760f 

L843 


m 


LIBRARY 

OF  THK 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 


OF" 


Class    IS'OS 
±&. 


ON    THE    USAGE 


OF 


QUOT1ENS  AND  QUOTIENSCUNQUE 


IN 


DIFFERENT  PERIODS  OF  LATIN. 


A  DISSERTATION 

PRESENTED  TO  THE  BOARD  OF  UNIVERSITY  STUDIES  OF 

THE  JOHNS  HOPKINS  UNIVERSITY  FOR  THE 

DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY. 


BY 


OMERA   FLOYD  LONG, 

SOMETIME  UNIVERSITY   SCHOLAR  AND  FELLOW. 


BALTIMORE: 

JOHN    MURPHY    COMPANY, 
i  got. 


ACKNOWLEDGMENT. 


During  my  graduate  work  courses  were  pursued  under  Professors 
Warren,  Gildersleeve  and  Bloomfield,  and  Associate  Professor 
Smith.  To  each  of  these  I  can  but  imperfectly  express  my  grati- 
tude for  various  kindnesses,  and  for  lasting  inspiration  as  well  as 
helpful  instruction. 

Owing  to  the  range  of  authors  cited  in  my  examples  the  manu- 
script of  this  dissertation,  though  complete  in  its  inferences  and 
its  main  outlines,  was  at  first  submitted  in  provisional  form. 
Later  a  visit  to  Munich  enabled  me  through  the  generous  courtesy 
of  Professor  Wolfflin  to  verify  many  of  my  references  with  the 
help  of  the  "  Thesauruszettel."  Professor  Wolfflin  himself,  at 
various  points  in  the  revision,  gave  helpful  suggestions,  such  as 
emphasis  on  quam  saepe,  of  which  I  had  at  that  time  only  a  few 
of  the  more  striking  examples,  pointing  out  the  occurrence  of 
nesoio  quotiens  in  the  Notae  Tironianae,  and  additional  examples 
of  quotienslibet,  together  with  remarks  on  gemination  in  con- 
nection with  the  compound  form.  Further  points  of  indebtedness 
will  be  acknowledged  as  far  as  possible  in  the  following  pages  by 
reference  to  his  Zusdtze  in  an  abstract  of  this  dissertation  which 
appeared  in  the  Archiv  fur  lateinische  Lexikographie  und  Gram- 
matik,  xi,  p.  395  if.— an  abstract  due  also  to  Professor  Wolfflin's 
generous  suggestion. 

O.  F.  LONG. 

NORTHWESTERN  UNIVERSITY, 
EVANSTON,  ILLINOIS. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE. 

INTRODUCTION,  7-8 

PAET  I. 

DERIVATION, 9~H 

FORM,                                                                                -        -        -  H-13 
COMPOUNDS, 

MEANING, 19-23 

AUTHORS  EXAMINED,  23-24 

PAET  II. 

CITATION  OF  EXAMPLES, 25-35 

PART  III. 

SUMMARY, 36-48 


INTRODUCTION. 


Little  or  nothing  hitherto  has  been  written  with  reference  to 
quotiens.  The  grammarians  have  been  content  with  brief  state- 
ments as  to  its  general  usage,  which  was  assumed  as  well  under- 
stood. Hand's  Tursellinus,  De  Particulis  Linguae  Latinae  was 
interrupted  before  reaching  quotiens;  Reisig's  Yorlesungen  iiber 
lateinische  Sprachwissenschaft,  with  its  various  revisions,  has 
nothing;  Draeger,  Historische  Syntax  der  lateinischen  Sprache,2 
n,  p.  584,  dismisses  the  word  after  stating  in  substance  that  it 
is  found  with  the  indicative  in  classical  Latin,  while  in  the 
period  of  silver  Latin  and  later  many  authors  use  the  sub- 
junctive mode.  Only  a  few  examples,  however,  are  cited  by 
Draeger.  Here  and  there,  in  a  line,  an  editor  has  discussed 
the  form  of  quotiens,  or  perhaps  has  noted  its  substitution  for 
ubi,  cum  or  si  quando.  The  form  has  naturally  been  discussed 
with  greatest  fullness  by  Neue,  Formenlehre  der  lateinischen 
Sprache,  and  by  Brambach,  die  Neugestaltung  der  lateinischen 
Orthographic.  On  the  more  difficult  question  of  quotiens  with 
the  subjunctive  in  iterative  sentences,  practically  nothing  has  been 
contributed  beyond  the  brief  paragraph  in  Draeger.  Such  works 
as  have  been  helpful  in  the  discussion  of  this  phase  of  the  subject 
have  been  quoted  in  Part  III. 

It  is  obvious,  however,  that  for  any  final  judgment  in  syntax 
the  historical  perspective  must  be  used,  and  each  individual  word, 
with  any  possible  alternatives  before  it,  must  give  a  complete 
account  of  itself.  The  desired  results  may  ultimately  be  reached 
by  investigating  every  point  in  individual  authors,  successively, 
until  the  literature  has  been  covered ;  or  by  following  a  single 
usage  through  approximately  all  the  authors,  until  the  various 
moot-points  have  thus  been  historically  treated.  The  present 
paper  offers  some  such  treatment  of  quotiens.  The  ante-classical 

7 


8  Introduction. 

and  classical  literature  has  been  thoroughly  covered,  and  there 
are  but  few  omissions  in  the  later  period  extending  as  far  down 
as  Boethius  and  Gregory  of  Tours.  Altogether,  about  one  hun- 
dred and  thirty  authors  have  been  examined. 

The  collection  of  examples  has  of  course  been  made  with  the 
help  of  special  lexicons  and  indices  verborum  where  these  were 
available  and  trustworthy.  In  most  cases,  however,  the  instances 
had  to  be  collected  for  the  first  time ; -accordingly,  the  privilege 
of  "nifallor"  is  asked  for  in  stating  totals.  It  may  be  claimed 
with  confidence  that  the  general  usage  for  the  long  period  con- 
sidered has  been  accurately  shown,  since  the  possible  omission 
of  an  example  here  and  there  would  make  no  material  difference 
in  the  results  obtained. 


DERIVATION. 

Quotiens  is  formed  with  quot  as  its  basis,  as  Miens  from  tot,  or 
the  post-classical  multotiens  from  multus,  plus  the  suffix  -iens, 
making  a  derivative  analogous  with  the  multiplicative  numerals 
in  -ies  (-iens).  Various  explanations  for  this  suffix  have  been 
proposed,  any  one  of  which,  if  satisfactory  for  one  word,  would 
suffice  for  the  entire  group,  since  the  principle  of  analogy,  power- 
ful every  where,  is  especially  strong  in  the  case  of  numerals.1  Some 
of  these  may  be  examined. 

a.  Aufrecht,  Die  lateinischen  Zahladverbien  auf  -iens,  K.  Z.  I, 
121  if.,  holds  that  -iens  represents  a  neuter  comparative  suffix  to  be 
compared  with  the  neuter  adjective  suffix  -ius  (-ios).  This  view 
has  little  probability  from  either  the  phonetic  side  or  the  meaning, 
and  apparently  finds  no  support  from  later  scholars.2 

6.  Joh.  Schmidt,  K.  Z.  xxv,  137  anm.  2,  would  equate 
triens  (  =  *triins)  directly  with  rpids,  from  which  we  might  sup- 
pose other  forms  spread.  Brugmann,3  however,  is  right  in  reject- 
ing this  equation  as  unwarranted. 

c.  In  the  Archiv  fur  lateinische  Lexikographie  und  Gram- 
matik,  v,  136  f.,  Stowasser  has  proposed  a  new  explanation,  based 
upon  the  simple  juxtaposition  of  the  participle  iens  with  quot, 
tot,  etc.;  so,  for  example,  he  cites  Verg.  .ZEn.  6, 122 

Itque  reditque  viam  tot  iens. 

i.  e.,  tot  <  itiones  >  iens  "  in  soviel  Gangen  "  ;  and  similarly  with 
other  forms  in  -ies  (-iens),  as  quinqu(e)  iens,  sex  iens,  sept(em)  iens, 

1  Cf.  Osthoff,  Morphologische  Untersuchungen,  I,  92  ff.,  and  Baunack,  Kuhn's 
Zeitschrift  f.  vergl.  Sprachforschung,  xxv,  253. 

8  Corssen,  Aussprache,  Vokalismus  u.  Betonung  d.  lat.  Sprache,  n,  pp.  351,  552 
anm.,  must  be  excepted. 

3  Grundr.  d.  vergl.  Gram.  II,  368. 

2  9 


10  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

etc.  The  formation  entered  the  language  very  early,  before  the 
present  law  for  accentuation  obtained,  and  readily  took  on  a 
numeral  connotation  on  account  of  the  Latin  aversion  to  such  a 
construction. 

That  this  view  simplifies  the  phonetic  difficulties  can  hardly 
be  denied,  and  a  similar  phenomenon  has  been  pointed  out1  in 
the  periphrastically  formed  multiplicatives  of  Anglo-Saxon,  where 
sftft  "journey"  is  added  to  both  ordinals  and  cardinals,2  and  of 
Hebrew,  which  makes  a  similar  use  of  paam  "  step,  walk/'  * 
Thurneysen 4  dismisses  this  explanation  as  "  kiinstlich " ;  but 
Delbriick 5  approves  it,  Deecke 6  also,  and  one  must  admit  that  it 
is  rather  seductive,  although  the  principle  of  juxtaposition  and 
reduction  is  on  the  whole  unscientific,  and  accordingly  to  be 
accepted  in  any  case  with  great  caution.7 

d.  Breal,  Memoires  de  la  Societe"  de  Linguistique  de  Paris,  vin, 
474,  like  Stowasser,  has  also  attempted  an  explanation  on  Latin 
ground.     From  quotus,  "  how  many,"  with  the  nominal  suffix  -iat 
-ie,  which  is  used  secondarily  (cf.  mater-ie-s,  temper-ie-s,  etc.),  he 
would  make   a   derivative  quoties,8  i.  e.,  to  form   a   proportion, 
quotus  :  quoties  : :  quantus  :  quantitas,  or  qualis  :  qualitas.      From 
this  formation  decies,  centies,  etc.,  would  follow  by  analogy ;  but 
the  persistency  with  which  n  clings  in  quotiens  and  its  regular 
occurrence  early  in  the  numerals  are  against  Briar's  view,9  even 
if  the  meaning  could  have  been  reached  in  this  way,  which  may 
be  doubted. 

e.  Still  another,  and,  on  the  whole,  more  satisfactory  derivation, 
is  offered  by  Thurneysen,  Zu  den  Zahladverbien  auf  -lens,  ALL. 
V,  575.      Here  it  is  rightly   assumed   that   the   suffix   did   not 

1  See  Kellner's  note  on  Stowasser's  article,  1. 1. 

3  Cf.  Bosworth-Tallieur,  Lex.  Ang.-Sax.,  s.  v. 

3  Cf.  Gesenius,  Hebr.  u.  Chald.Worterb.,  s.  v.  *  ALL.  v,  575 ;  cf.  infra. 

5  Vergl.  Synt.  p.  628.  6 Erlauterungen  z.  Iat.  Schulgram.  \  71, 1. 

7  See  Stolz,  ALL.  v,  285,  and  Mullens  Handb.  d.  klass.  Altertumswissenschaft, 
n8,  2  Abteil.  p.  145. 

8 "Nous  avons  ici  une  expression  technique  venue  de  la  langue  du  calcul. 
C'est-a-dire  un  substantif  de*signant  1'un  des  facteurs  de  la  multiplication  ou  de 
la  division." 

9  Though  he  generously  allows  n  to  be  from  an  old  ace.  plur.,  preserved  by 
"  purification  adverbiale,"  or  else  parasitic. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  1 1 

originate  on  Italian  soil.  The  word  quotiens  itself  may  be  com- 
pared with  Skr.  kiyant,1  "  how  great,  how  many,"  whose  neuter, 
kiyat,  employed  adverbially,  is  taken  as  the  starting  point.  From 
-yat,  with  a  basis  of  int,  nasalis  sonans  having  entered,  assume 
Ital.  -lent,  which  appears  as  -iens  through  a  change  of  -nt  to  -ns. 
This  change  is  warranted  by  what  we  see  in  the  Oscan  and 
Umbrian  verbs,  where  the  ending  -ns  of  the  third  plural  in 
secondary  tenses  stands  for  original  -nt,  while  the  final  -nt  of  the 
primary  tenses  stands  for  Ind.-Ger.  -nil ; 2  but,  since  ordinarily 
final  -ns  became  -f,  it  must  be  assumed  on  Thurneysen's  hypothesis 
that  the  change  of  -nt  to  -ns  is  not  primitive  Italic.  Von  Planta, 
1.  L,  has  suggested  that  the  Osc.-Umbr.  -nt  first  became  nd  (cf.  the 
•change  of  -t  to  d  in  the  third  sing,  of  secondary  tenses),  then 
-nd  >  -nZj  through  -rr3,  and  -nz  naturally  became  -ns.  Here 
again  we  must  suppose  -nd  >  -n%  before  the  Osc.-Umbr.  assimila- 
tion of  -nd  to  -nn.3  A  similar  change  would  be  that  of  the  neuter 
participle  ferens  =  *ferent  (cf.  Skr.  bharat,  Ind.-Ger.  *bhernt\ 
perhaps  after  the  analogy  of  adjectives  like  ingens,  etc.4 

This  view  of  Thurneysen's,  while  not  wholly  free  from  phonetic 
difficulties,  is  accepted  by  Brugmann,5  Stolz,6  Lindsay,7  and  may 
be  regarded  as  the  most  satisfactory  yet  offered. 

FORM. 

In  the  case  of  the  multiplicatives,  the  classical  form,  from  five 
on,  is  with  the  ending  -ies,  for  the  earlier  -lens,  though  the  earlier 
forms  were  often  retained  by  the  side  of  the  later  ones.8  This 
elimination  of  n  before  s  was  of  not  infrequent  occurrence  even 
in  old  inscriptions,  as  the  familiar  mesibus,  cosul,  cesor,  etc.,  attest, 
and  was  doubtless  due  to  a  certain  nasal  quality  assumed  by  the 

1  Pron.  ki  (Lat.  gui\  plus  the  suffix  -yant.     Cf.  quot  with  kati. 

2  Cf.  Bugge,  K.  Z.  xxn,  385  ff.,  and  von  Planta,  Gram.  d.  osk.-umbr.  Dialekte, 
•Strassburg,  1892,  I,  p.  513.  3  See  von  Planta,  p.  417  f. 

4  Thurneysen,  1.  L,  and  Stolz,  Handb.  n3,  2,  145. 

4  Grundr.Vergl.  Gram,  n,  562. 

«ALL.  v,  285;  Handb.  n>,  2,  145. 

7  Lat.  Lang.  pp.  284, 409. 

*  Prise.  Corp.  Gram,  in,  77, 15  ff. ;  Lindsay,  p.  408. 


12  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotiemeunque. 

preceding  vowel,  so  that  the  consonantal  element  was  more  and 
more  reduced,  even  to  the  point  of  total  disappearance.1 

Later,  even  the  -ies  in  the  definite  numerals  was  often  reduced 
to  -is,  both  in  literature  and  in  inscriptions,  as  decis,  sexsis,  GIL. 
xii,  2087  (559  A.  D.).2 

With  the  indefinite  quotiens,  aliquotiens,  totiens  and  multotiens, 
however,  the  best  tradition  favors  the  retention  of  -lens.  The 
statements  of  the  grammarians  show  the  actual  practice.  Compare 
Priscian,  Corp.  Gram,  in,  415,  18  reliqua  omnia  in  es  pro- 
ductam  desinunt  ....  infinitis  tamen  numerorum  adverbiis 
etiam  n  interponitur,  quotiens,  totiens  similiter  multotiens.  Marius 
Victorinus,  ibid,  vi,  24,  23,  and  Caper  vii,  95,  8,  are  equally 
insistent.  The  n  seems  to  have  fallen  out  entirely  at  last,  for 
while  Albinus  vji,  308,  14  at  least  reports  that  formerly  the 
n  was  used :  quoties,  toties  sine  n,  licet  veteres  per  n,  Beda  VJI, 
287,  5  makes  no  reservation  :  quoties,  toties,  septies,  sine  n. 

The  inscriptions  and  literature  show  that  Priscian's  rule  was 
not  arbitrarily  formed,3  but  was  based  upon  practice.  Augustus, 
in  the  Mon.  Anc.,  has  only  quotienscunque  (iv,  28)  by  the  side 
of  the  earlier  forms — deciens,  viciens,  quadragiens,  sescentiens,  etc.,* 
and  similarly  quotiens  is  the  form  in  both  the  Lex  Agraria  and 
the  Lex  Repetundarum,  CIL.  I,  200,  z.  25;  i,  198,  z.  48,  Com- 
pare further  n,  1963,  col.  1,  z.  38-39 ;  n,  3367,  and  O.-H.  4358, 
z.  20;  4374,  z.  16. 

For  the  Ciceronian  form,  compare  C.  F.  W.  Miiller,  adnot.  crit.  n, 
2,  p.  xxxi :  totiens,  quotiens  quae  formae  nusquam  non  sunt  in  rnell. 
codd.;  and,  by  way  of  further  illustration,  the  following  may  be 
cited  :  quotiens,  Ter.  Hec.  60,  though  milies,  Eun.  422 ; 5  quotiens, 
Sail.  Hist.  Frag.  2,  98,  1 ;  tricies,  4,  81  ;  quotiens,  Propert.  1,  3, 

1  So  Cicero  is  reported  by  Vel.  Long.  Corp.  Gram,  vn,  79,  1,  as  pronouncing 
foresia  instead  of  forensia,  Megalesia  instead  of  Megalensia.      Compare,  on  the 
whole  question,  Job.  Schmidt,  Zur  Gesch.  d.  indogerm.  Vocal,  i,  98  ff.,  Brugmann, 
Grundriss,  i2,  p.  370  f.,  and  Seelmann,  Die  Aussprache  d.  Latein,  p.  283  ff.    Bennett, 
Appendix  to  Latin  Grammar,  Boston,  1895,  p.  20,  while  skeptical  as  to  this  ex- 
planation, offers  nothing  in  its  stead. 

2  Cf.  Lindsay,  p.  409,  and  Schuchardt,  Der  Vocal,  d.  Vulgarlat.  II,  515. 

3  Yet  compare  Brambach,  p.  269. 

4  See  Mommsen,  Res  Gestae  Divi  Augusti,  1883,  p.  192. 
^Miliens,  Dziatzko,  against  the  MSS. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  13 

27  ;  decies,  2, 4, 16  ;  quotienscunque,  Fronto,  p.  152  (N.) ;  quinquies, 
p.  139;  Hygin.  Grom.  ch.  36  sed  habemus  numerum  IIII  milia, 
videmus,  quotiens  habeo  :  quod  est  octies ;  Ael.  Lamprid.  Corn- 
mod.  11,  11,  quotiens,  but  in  11,  12,  septingenties  tricies  quinquies. 
Martial  presents  strong  contrast  in  forty  examples  of  quotiens, 
while  decies  occurs  nineteen  times;  centies,  seven ;  tricies  and  vicies, 
two,  etc.1  That  the  definite  numerals  were  sometimes  even  cor- 
rected (sic!)  to  the  shorter  form  may  be  seen  from  Verg.  Ge.  4, 
480,  where  noviens  of  Rom.  and  the  Sched.Vat.  has  the  n  stricken 
out  in  the  latter.2 

Note. — The  frequent  confusion  of  ti  and  ci  before  a  vowel  in  late 
inscriptions  and  MSS.  may  be  seen  in  the  form  quociens  (quociens- 
cunque),  e.  g.  in  Cato  apud  Gell.  2,  28,  6  (cod.  Vat.),  Cic.  Plane.  14 
(Erfurtensis),  Martianus  Capella,  3,  302,  and  Victor  Vitensis, 
Corp.  Eccl.  p.  83,  9.  No  inscription  or  older  MS.  gives  this 
spelling,  which  obviously  contradicts  the  derivation,  and  in  the 
Notae  Tironianae,  according  to  so  clever  an  interpreter  as  W. 
Schmitz,3  there  is  actual  representation  of  the  t  in  the  middle 
stroke  of  the  character  used  for  quotiens, 

COMPOUNDS. 

A  final  discussion  of  the  relation  of  the  compound  to  the  simple 
form  must  follow  the  citation  of  examples,  yet  it  was  very  early 
suspected  that  examples  of  quotienscunque  would  not  be  compara- 
tively numerous.  In  some  respects  the  reason  for  this  disparity  is 
obvious  at  once,  partly  in  the  unwieldy  length  of  the  compound, 
especially  for  poetic  use,  and  partly  in  the  general,  indefinite  nature 
which  quotiens  itself  could  so  readily  assume.  Accordingly  prose 
examples  of  quotienscunque  should  be  far  in  excess  of  its  use  by  the 
poets,  and  this  is  precisely  what  we  find  to  be  true.  Indeed,  with 
the  unimportant  exception  of  two  examples  in  Plautus,  it  will 

lCf.  Gilbert  in  Friedl.  Mart.  I,  p.  Ill ;  Neue  n«,  336  f. 

3  Cf.  further,  Hildebrand  on  Apul.  Met.  2,  3,  citing  the  evidence  of  older  editors. 

3Zeitschrift  Panstenographkikon,  Band  i,  Dresden,  1874,  on  quotiens  in  the 
Notae  Bernenses,  and  see  Tab.  10,  28  and  29  of  Schmitz's  Commentarii  Not.  Tiron. 

Prof.  Wolfflin,  who  furnishes  the  first  reference,  makes  further  interpretation 
of  the  character,  ALL.  xi,  p.  395. 


14  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

be  found  that  the  compound  is  wholly  confined  to  prose.     Com- 
pare e.  g.  Juv.  3,  318 

quotiens  te 

Roma  tuo  refici  properantem  reddet  Aquino, 
Me  quoque  ad  Helvinam  Cererem  vestramque  Dianam 
Converte  a  Cumis. 

and  Fronto,  ad  Amic.  1,  3  (p.  175  N.) :  quotienscunque  Roruam 
venit,  in  meo  contubernio  fuit. 

Numerous  examples  of  quotiens  occur  where  quotienseunque 
could  have  been  used.  Occasional  attempts  have  been  made  by 
editors  to  point  out  such  instances.  So  e.  g.  Knoell,  Eugippius, 
vit.  Sanct.  Severini,  Corp.  Eccl.  p.  33,  1  quam,  quotiens  ripas 
excessisset,  aqua  superfluous  occupabat,  and  again  p.  5,  1 9  quotiens 
sermo  ortus  est ;  Hartel,  Lucifer  Calar.  p.  4,  16  quotiens  mur- 
muravit  populus  contra  deum  .  .  .  legisti  deum  dixisse  etc. ; 
p.  268,  22  quotiens  dicitur  a  nobis  tibi  non  te  potuisse  dei  unici 
filii  negatorem  existere,  etc.;  p.  254,  24;  293,  15.  Examples 
might  be  multiplied,  but  it  is  more  in  point  to  view  this  historically 
and  to  assign  a  cause  for  what  might  otherwise  be  thought  largely 
due  to  individual  caprice  or  inaccuracy.  The  simple  quotiens  must 
have  been  felt  to  have  so  general  a  distributive  force  that  even  a 
better  writer  than  Eugippius  or  Lucifer  might  use  it  where  a 
modern  editor  would  demand  a  compound ;  compare  Cic.  ad  Att. 
11,  13,  5  velim,  ut  soles,  facias,  quotiensque  habebis,  cui  des  ad 
me  litteras,  nolim  praetermittas  with  ad  Fam.  16,  11,  3  cura  ut 
valeas  litterasque  ad  me  mittas,  quotienscunque  habebis,  cui  des. 
Here  Cicero  was  cither  uncertain  which  form  to  use,  a  conclusion 
contradicted  by  his  other  examples,  or  quotiens  alone  was  suffi- 
ciently indefinite  where  special  emphasis  was  not  intended;  just 
as  the  simple  totiens  is  used  throughout  the  language  without  a 
single  example  of  totienscunque,  whether  alone  or  in  correlation 
with  quotiens  or  quotienscunque.1  Other  instances  of  parallel  usage 
are  not  hard  to  find.  Cf.  Varro,  R.  R.  3,  10,  7  quotienscunque 

1  Obviously  quotienseunque  .  .  .  totienscunque  would  have  been  too  clumsy.  Lewis 
and  Short  cite  taliscunque  as  air.  etp.,  Auct.  Priap.  16,  but  quale  not  qualecunque  is  used 
with  it.  Cf.  Wolff.,  Die  Gemination  im  Lateinischen,  Sitzungsberichte  d.  Bayr. 
Akad.  d.  Wissensch.  1882,  p.  463. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  arid  Quotienseunque.  15 

sumpserunt,  locus  solet  purgari  and  Petron.  ch.  90  quotiens 
theatrum  .  .  .  intravi,  hac  me  adventicia  excipere  frequentia 
solet;  Valer.  Max.  3,  6,  4  C.  Duellius  .  .  .  quotienscunque 
epulatus  erat  .  .  .  domum  reverti  solitus  est  and  Epit.  Par.,  quo- 
tiens p.  e.  .  .  .  deducebatur;  Celsus  6,  6, 16  quotienscunque  non 
adicio  .  .  .  aquam  intellegi  volo  and  id.  5,  19,  24  quae  quotiens 
adiciuntur  cerussae  vel  spumae  argenti,  scire  licet,  etc. ;  7,  12,  1 
ad  fin.  quotienscunque  dente  exempto  radix  relicta  est  .  .  .  exi- 
menda  est  and  6,  15  ad  raed.  quotiens  autem  medicamentum 
inicitur,  .  .  .  os  eluendum  est ;  8,  10,  1  ad  med.  quotienscunque 
autem  solvitur  membrum,  calida  aqua  fovendum  est  and  8,  10,  2 
ad  fin.  quotiens  solutae  sunt,  fractura  manu  continenda ;  Cyprian, 
Corp.  Eccl.  p.  430,  18  ut  quotienscunque  inimicus  accesserit  .  .  . 
clausum  adversum  se  pectus  inveniat  and  id.  p.  430,  1 9  ut  quotiens 
adire  temptaverit,  clausum,  etc. ;  Ps.-Cypr.  p.  30,  20  Sic  quotiens- 
cunque .  .  .  distenta  imbribus  frumenta  turgescunt,  fecundae  messes 
coguntur  aestate  and  p.  31,  2  Sic  quotiens  ferro  vitis  absciditur, 
erumpentibus  pampinis  melius  uva  vestitur;  August.  Civ.  Dei  11, 
31  ad  rned.  quotienscunque  ceciderit,  non  peribit  and  Sen.  Epp. 
2,  1,  2  quotiens  cecidit,  contumacior  resurrexit;  Serv.  ad  Eel.  1, 
36  vocativus  Graecus  est,  qui  brevis  est,  quotienscunque  nominativus 
'is  '  terminatur  and  id.  -ZEn.  1, 108  genetivus  enim  pluralis  quotiens 
in  'ium'  exit,  accusativum  pluralem  in  Ms'  mittit;  JEn.  1,  9  est 
figura  hypallage,  quae  fit  quotienscunque  per  contrarium  verba 
intelleguntur  and  .2En.  1,  23  antonomasia  est,  non  epitheton  ;  quae 
fit  quotiens  pro  proprio  nomine  ponitur  quod  potest  esse  cum 
proprio  nomine;  JEn.  1,  73  est  tropus  systole,  qui  fit  quotiens- 
cunque longa  corripitur  syllaba,  etc.  and  1,  208  pleonasmos  est,  qui 
fit  quotiens  adduntur  superflua ;  ^En.  1,  77  figura  est  litotes,  quae 
fit  quotienscunque  minus  dicimus  et  plus  significamus  and  1,  435 
est  translatio,  quae  fit  quotiens  vel  deest  verborum  proprietas,  vel 
vitatur  iteratio;  cf.  further  ^En.  1,  209;  228;  251  ;  3,  384.  In 
the  last  examples  may  be  seen  the  cause  already  referred  to,  for 
the  simple  relative  with  a  present  indicative  in  definitions,  general 
statements  and  conditions  comes  to  be  so  extensively  used  that  in 
the  later  literature  quotienscunque  is  overshadowed  and  practically 
supplanted.  See  Part  III  for  statistics. 

To  give  a  pronoun  or  a  pronominal  adverb  a  general  meaning 


16  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

the  earlier  language  doubled  the  simple  form.1  So  quis  gives 
quisquis  (archaic  quirquir,  Varro,  L.L.  7,  2,  8)  and  similarly  we 
have  ututj  ubiubi,  undeunde,  quotquot  (though  not  early),  quantus- 
quantus,  qualisqualis.  Qualiterqualiter  is  cited  for  the  Jurists, 
Digest.  IV,  4,  7,  §  1  ;  ix,  2,  7,  §  1 ;  xxvi,  7,  5,  §  10,2  but  is  rare, 
if  it  occurs  at  all,  elsewhere  on  account  of  aversion  to  doubling  a 
word  of  three  syllables.  Quotiensquotiens,  therefore,  was  never 
formed.  "Am  meistens,"  Prof.  Wolfflin  states,  1.1.  p.  449,  "  hat  sich 
die  Sprache  gegen  die  Verdoppelung  der  mehrsilbigen  Pronominal- 
formen  gestraubt,  ...  so  sehen  wir,  dass  die  lateinische  Sprache 
mit  Ausnahme  zweier  oder  dreier  Casus  sich  der  geminierten 
Formen  zu  erwehren  oder  dereu  Weiterbildung  zu  storen  gesucht 
hat,  was  natiirlich  nur  moglich  war,  wenn  sie  dafiir  eine  bessere 
und  deutlichere  Ersatzbildung  bieten  konnte.  Eine  solche  fand  sie 
in  cunque,  in  welchem  cum=quom  temporal  in  Sinne  von  'wann, 
jedesmal  wann,  immer ?  zu  verstehen  ist ;  also  quicunque  =  wer 
immer.  In  que  aber  erkennen  wir  denselben  wiederholten,  nur 
abgeschwachten  und  unflectierten  Pronoruinalstarnm."  Instead 
then  of  the  double  forms  we  have  utcunque,  ubicunque,  undecunque, 
quotcunque  (as  old  as  *Catull.  64,  280),  quantuACunque,  qualiscunque  ; 
cf.  also  quisque  (=  quisquis)  and  quandoque  (=  quandocunque). 
Quandoque  in  this  sense  is  found  as  early  as  the  Tabb.  xn,  though 
in  general  examples  are  comparatively  rare.3  A  formulaic  exam- 
ple is  found  in  Cic.  Caecin.  54  quandoque  te  in  iure  conspicio,  but 
this  is  weakened  by  the  parallel  passage,  Mur.  26  quando  te  in 
iure  conspicio.  A  clear  example,  however,  is  de  Ke  Pub.  6,  22, 
24;  and  aside  from  the  poetic  passages  Hor.  C.  4,  1,  17;  2,  34 ; 
A.P.  359,4  the  same  abbreviation  may  be  found  in  Livy  1,  31,  4; 
29,  10,  5 ;  39,  24,  1 ;  Col.  2,  10,  6  ;  7,  4,  7  ;  11,  3,  22  ;  Juv.  2,  82  ; 
5,  172;  14,  51  ;  Lactant.  Inst.  p.  235,  14  (Brandt),  (cf.  quando- 
cunque  p.  235,  6);  Orosius  p.  152,  1  (Zang.)  (quandocunque  p. 
366,  1). 

It  is  evidently  after  the  analogy  of  quandoque  that  quotiensque 
(=  quotienscunque),   cited  below,   was  formed.      This   compound 

1  Wolfflin,  Gemination,  p.  422  ff.,  ALL.  1.1. 

*  Dirksen,  Man.  Latinitatis  Fontium  Juris  Civilis,  797. 

*  Schmalz,  Lat.  Synt.3  %  305. 

4  Quandocunque  occurs,  Epp.  1,  14,  17 ;  16,  58. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  17 

has  scant  recognition  in  the  lexicons.  The  citations  are  limited 
to  Col.  6,  17,  9  (Quidam  Icgunt — Forcell.) :  sed  quotiensque  mel 
aliusve  succus  remediis  adhibetur.  No  earlier  example  occurs, 
since  the  Augustan  writers  employ  quotiensque  invariably  in  the 
sense  of  et  quotiens.  Cf.  Ovid,  A.  A.  2,  327 

Multa  vove,  sed  cuncta  palam.  quotiensque  libebit, 
Quae  referas  illi  somnia  laeta  vide. 

Met.  3,  495 

Quae  tamen  ut  vidit,  quamvis  irata  memorque, 
Indoluit,  quotiensque  puer  miserabilis  '  Eheu  ! ' 
Dixerat,  haec  resonis  iterabat  vocibus,  Eheu. 

Met.  4,  588  ;  10,  164;  Amor.  2,  8,  27;  Manil.  1,  513;  Cic.  Cat. 
3,  5,  11 ;  ad  Att.  11,  13,  5;  and  later  in  Valer.  Flacc.  8,  364; 
Sil.  Ital.  12,  145;  Curt.  4,  10,  6;  Plin.  Pan.  88;  Gell.  14,  7,  4. 

The  apparatus  criticus  of  Schneider's  edition  justifies  other 
examples  of  quotiensque  in  Columella,  though  neither  Schneider 
nor  Gesner  reads  this  form.1  Cf.  2,  4,  10  Paulum  tamen,  quo- 
tiensque (I.  B.  Br.,  quotiesque,  ex  Pol.  excerpt.)  iterabitur  .... 
obliquum  agi  sulcum  oportebit ;  12,  51,  2  idque  fieri  debebit, 
quotiensque  (I.  B.  Br.  R.) ;  52,  16  eamque  suffitionem  semper  faci- 
endam  iudicaut,  quotiensque  (Br.)  vel  nova  vel  vetera  vasa  curantur.2 

Suetonius  and  Ulpian  also  furnish  examples:  cf.  Aug.  37 
excogitavit  ....  triumviratum  ....  recognoscendi  turmas 
equitum,  quotiensque  opus  esset,  and  Calig.  7  cuius  effigiem  .... 
in  cubiculo  positam,  quotiensque  introiret,  exosculabatur.  Two 
examples  in  the  Digest  have  been  recognized  by  Kriegel  and 
Mommsen.  In  Ulp.  Dig.  VII,  4,  3  praef.  quotiensque  capite 
minutus  erit,  quoties  quis  was  read  before  Kriegel  ;  ibid.  XLIII, 
8,  2,  10  quotiensque  aliquid  in  publico  fieri  permittitur  is  due 
to  Mommsen,  since  quotienscunque  is  read  by  Kriegel  following 
the  corrector  of  the  codex  Florentinus.  Silvia,  Peregrin.  50  nam 
consuetudo  talis  erat  in  illo  tempore,  ut  palatia,  quotiensque 

1  The  promised  critical  edition  of  Lundstrom  has  not,  unfortunately,  been  seen. 

2  Observe  that  Schneider  in  2,  10,  16 ;  7,  4,  7;  11,  3,  22,  accepts  the  better 
known  quandogue  on  the  same  authority. 


18  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

fabricabantur,  semper  in  editioribus  locis  fierent  is  a  more  certain 
example,  though  quotienscunque  is  read  by  Cholodniak,  and  Geyer 
has  questioned  the  reading.1  Quotiensque  with  good  MS.  authority, 
especially  in  late  Latin,  has  doubtless  in  many  cases  been  quietly 
corrected  (!)  by  an  editor  unfamiliar  with  the  abbreviated  compound. 
So  in  Ruricius,  p.  382,  13,  Engelbrecht  reads  quotienscunque 
sanctos  viros  ....  aerumnarum  mole  depressi  coguntur  expetere 
following  the  lectio  vulgata,  while  the  Codex  Sangallensis  (Sc.  ix) 
preserves  the  correct  quotiensque?  Cf.  similarly  Ammianus  Marc. 
16,  10,  18  ut  quotienscunque  (quotiensque,  Vat.)  concepisset, 
immaturum  abiceret  partum. 

Along  with  the  method  of  composition  already  given,  -vis  and 
-libet  were  used  to  give  similar  effect,  as  in  quivis,3  quilibet,  undelibet, 
quotlibet,  etc.  This  formation,  however,  is  not  so  freely  used,  for 
while  quilibet  is  common  from  Plaut.  on,  quotlibet  is  cited  first 
from  Hygin.  Astron.  1,  6,4  and  quandolibet  (=  quandoque  =  ali- 
quondo)  occurs  first  in  Lactant.  Opific.  Dei  p.  15,  20  (Brandt)  necesse 
est  igitur  ut  mortem  recipiat  quandolibet,  quoniam  corporalis  est. 
Cf.  ibid,  p.  16,  18  qui  quandoque  moriturus  est  and  Inst.  p.  151,  5. 
Quotienslibet  is  also  rare  and  is  not  cited  by  Georges  earlier  than 
Boeth.  Mus.  1,  4  (p.  192,  2  Fried.)  where  it  is  used  as  an  indefi- 
nite :  cum  maior  numerus  habet  in  se  minorem  vel  bis  vel  ter  vel 
quotienslibet.  But  other  examples  not  cited  by  Georges  occur  in 
Boeth.,  e.g.  Arith.  1,  14  (p.  31,  5  Fried.)  Metitur  numerus  nu- 
merum,  quotiens  vel  semel  vel  bis  vel  tertio  vel  quotienslibet 
numerus  ad  numerum  comparatus  ....  ad  comparati  numeri 
terminum  usque  pervenerit;  1,  29  (p.  61,  4)  autduplum  aut  triplum 
aut  quadruplum  aut  quotienslibet ;  and  the  form  is  not  only  much 
earlier,  but  it  occurs  as  a  relative,  potentially  at  least,  in  Celsus  4, 
23  non  quotienslibet  desidere,  sed  quotiens  necesse  est.  Cf.  again 
Rusticius,  contra  Acephalos,  Patrol.  LXVII,  Col.  1190  (Migne)  idem 

1  Cf.  Krit.  Bemerkungen  z.  S.  Silviae  Peregrin.  (St.  Anna  Program),  Augsburg, 
1890,  p.  34:  quotiensque  (lies  quotienscunque  nach  S.  67,  6:  quotienscunque). 

•Also  read  in  the  text  of  Krusch,  Mon.  Oer.  Hist,  vm,  Berol.  1887. 

3  Even  quiviscunque,  Lucret.  3,  388 ;  Mart.  14,  2,  1.  Similarly  quisquislibet  of 
late  Latin,  cf.  Salv.  adv.  Avar.  3, 18  ;  Avitus,  Mon.  Ger.p.  28,  13  (Peip.) ;  39, 10. 

4 Cited  by  Lewis  and  Short  as  for.  tip,  but  cf.  Boeth.  Arith.  1,  31  (p.  65,  5 
Fried.) ;  2,  2  (p.  80,  9) ;  2,  43  (p.  140,  20) ;  Mus.  2,  8  (p.  236,  7  ;  8) ;  passim. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Qaotienscunque.  19 

namque  est,  quotienslibet  quis  convertat  verbositate  sermones,  and 
the  indefinite  use,  Arnmian.  Marc.  21,  5,  3  vigore  corumuni 
Romanis  agminibus  quotienslibet  Rhenum  pervium  feci.  The 
combination  quotiensque  (=  et  quotiens)  libebit  is  found  in  Ovid, 
A.  A.  2,  327. 

In  a  similar  way  a  quotiensvis  might  be  assumed  from  such  com- 
binations as  quotiens  velles,  Sen.  Controv.  4,  praef.  7 ;  quotiens 
velis,  Sen.  Epp.  6,  3,  9 ;  quotiens  voles,  ibid.  4,  6,  4 ;  de  Ben.  4, 

7,  1  ;  Vicies  septies  dices  et  quotiens  volueris  repetes,  Marcell. 
p.  Ill,  28  (Helmr.),  etc.     This  form,  however,  does  not  occur. 
Quandovis  in  our  analogy  is  also  lacking. 

An  interesting  combination  which  points  to  the  easy  language 
of  every  day  life  is  seen  in  nescio  quotiens,  after  the  analogy  of 
nescio  quando  (cf.  Cic.  Philipp.  2,  3),  or  the  earlier  and  more  com- 
mon nescio  quomodo.  That  nescio  quotiens  was  of  frequent  use  is 
shown  by  its  occurrence  in  the  Notae  Tironianae  (Schmitz,  Com- 
ment. 10,  31)  along  with  nescio  quomodo.  The  extant  literature 
oddly  enough  shows,  as  far  as  I  have  noted,  but  one  example, 
August.  Civ.  Dei  12,  18  init.  horainem  nescio  quibus  circnitibus, 
nescio  quotiens  revolutum. 

Further  comparison  with  quando  furnishes  the  following  parallels ; 
quando  si  quando  quando  umquam 2  quandocunque 

quotiens  si  quotiens1     quotiens  saepez  quotienscunque 

quandoque  qaandolibet  nescio  quando 

quotiensque  quotienslibet  nescio  quotiens. 

MEANING. 

The  strict  meaning  of  quotiens,  "  how  many  times,"  may  be  seen 
e.g.  in  Plaut.  Cure.  608  Dixi  tibi  .  .  .:  quotiens  dicendumst? 
In  the  Nov.  Test,  it  is  accordingly  used  to  render  7ro<ra/a?  (Matth. 
18,  21  ;  23,  27 ;  Luc.  13,  24)  or  ocra/a?,  as  in  the  Lord's  Supper, 

1  After  si  for  aliquotiens;  but  three  instances  have  been  noted,  Ovid,  Trist. 
5,  10,  42;  Sulp.  Sever,  p.  131,  5  (Halm) ;  204,  4.  Cf.  nisi  quotiens  Serv'.  ad  ^En. 

8,  268;  Sid.  Apoll.  7,  14,  11. 

'For  emphasis  after  si,  but  only  in  Livy,  e.g.  6,  42,  12;  8,  4,  6  (Weissenb. 
adloc.);  10,  14,  11. 

3  Evidently  a  cross  between  quotiens  and  its  equivalent  quam  saepe  (cf.  infra). 
Only  one  example  was  noted,  Sid.  Apoll.  1,  7,  2. 


20  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

1  Corinth.  11,  25  quotienscunque  bibetis  (OCTCLKL^  eav 
Apocal.  11,  6  quotienscunque  voluerint  (oo-a/a?  eav  6e\r)<Tu>(Ti}. 
Compare  Prise.  Ill  (K.)  132,  8  adverbiura,  interrogativum  et 
relativum  quotiens,  TTOO-CLKL^  KCLI  o<ra/a?. 

In  the  freer  sense  "  how  often "  the  early  Latin  had  already 
used. quam  saepe,  possibly  before  the  formation  of  quotiens.  Com- 
pare for  analogy  quam  diu.  Quam  saepe  is  found  first  in  Ter. 
Phorm.  757  quam  saepe  forte  temere  Eveniunt  quae  non  audeas 
optare,  without  comment  by  Donatus.  The  Auctor  ad  Heren. 
3,  12,  21  follows  with  quam  (quae  codd.)  saepe  rerum  naturae 
gratia  quaedam  hire  debetur.  Cicero  confines  his  few  examples  to 
the  Philosophical  works  and  the  Letters ;  cf.  Tusc.  2,  41 ;  de 
Div.  1,  97 ;  2,  62,  and  ad  Att.  10,  9,  1  ;  ad  Fam.  7,  10,  3,  where 
the  parallels  quam  insulsi  and  quam  diligenter  should  be  noted. 
Similarly  tarn  saepe  (=  totiens,  found  as  early  as  Plaut.  Merc.  33) 
is  parallel  with  tarn  vehementer,  ad  Att.  3,  10,  2,  though  totiens  et 
tarn  longe  occurs  in  4,  16,  7.  Compare  a  similar  chance  for  sub- 
stitution in  quotiens  et  quam  diu,  Sen.  Controv.  4  Praef.  7  and 
quam  diu  et  quotiens,  Apul.  Apolog.  73.  In  the  orations  Cic. 
shifts  to  quam  crebro,  Mil.  69;  Pliilipp.  2,  70,  as  Catull.  changes 
to  ut  saepe,  66,  30.  Plautus  had  used  the  latter  expression  once, 
Capt.  165. 

Csesar,  B.  C.  3,  72,  4  quam  parvulae  saepe  causae  rnagna  detri- 
menta  intulissent  may  fairly  be  cited  since  the  quam  saepe  and 
parvulae  causae  are  separated  by  traiectio,  as  is  the  phrase  in  Cic. 
de  Div.  2,  62. 

In  the  Augustan  age  examples  are  still  to  be  cited  :  Tibull. 
1,  6,  21 ;  8,  53;  Ovid,  Am.  1,  14,  47.  Livy  34,  20,  6  memores, 
quam  saepe  in  agro  eorum  irnpune  persultassent,  quotiens  ipsos 
signis  collatis  fudissent  is  noteworthy  especially  since  quam  saepe 
precedes.  Cf.  further  Quintil.  6,  3,  77  apparet,  inquit,  quam 
saepe  accendatis  (quoting  Augustus) ;  again  in  Juv.  9,  73,  and  in 
late  Latin  Boeth.  Mus.  1,  1  (p.  184,  7  Fried.)  An  interesting 
blending  of  quotiens  and  quam  saepe  through  the  carelessness  of 
epistolary  style  is  seen  in  Sid.  Apoll.  Epp.  1,  7,  2  O  quotiens 
saepe  ipse  se  ad  versa  perpessum  gloriabatur  ! 

A  complete  list  of  quam  saepe  is  not  offered,  but  a  large  number 
of  representative  authors  of  various  periods  has  been  examined, 


On  the  Usage  c>f  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  21 

and  the  search  shows  that  only  sporadic  examples  of  substitution 
occur  from  Plautus  on,  even  as  late  as  Boethius,  while  their  limited 
number  affords  no  absolute  olue  to  their  sphere.  Quotiens  and 
totiens  practically  displaced  these  combinations  early  in  the  lan- 
guage, as  examples  from  Plautus  show,  and,  aside  from  the  pos- 
sibilities in  the  case,  the  "  Konkurrenz  "  is  not  striking. 

Neither  quotiens  nor  quotienscunque  per  se  necessarily  expresses 
a  large  number  of  times.  Cf.  for  example  Alfen.  Var.  Digest, 
xxxin,  1,  22  Filiae  meae,  quotienscunque  vidua  erit,  in  annos 
singulos  centum  heres  meus  dato.  Accordingly,  it  is  unnecessary 
with  Wex1  and  Peerlkamp2  to  demand  si  quando  in  Tac.  Agric. 
1  clarorum  virorum  facta  moresque  posteris  tradere,  antiquitus 
usitatum,  ne  nostris  quidem  teraporibus  ....  aetas  omisit, 
quotiens  magna  aliqua  ac  nobilis  virtus  vicit  ac  supergressa  est 
.  .  .  .  ignorantiam  recti  et  invidiam.  Peerlkamp,  following 
Wex,  remarks  :  virtus  tarn  rara  postulabat,  ni  fallor,  si  quando. 
Restringe  significationem  adverbii  quotiens,  semper  maiorem  nu- 
merum  indicat  quam  in  tempora  praesertim  Neronis  et  Domitiani 
cadit.  But  there  are  in  reality  two  apodoses  in  the  first  clause, 
the  early  practice  (antiquitus  usitatum)  and  its  survival  (ne  nostris 
quidem  temporibus,  etc.),  to  each  of  which  in  the  author's  thought 
quotiens  belongs.  A  correct  interpretation  is  given  by  Pohlmann,3 
though  disputed  by  Planck.4 

Quotiens  expresses  only  iteration,  not  frequency,  unless  the  con- 
text makes  these  two  synonomous.  Cf.  Marcell.  p.  376, 17  (Helmr.) 
et  die  bis  aut  ter  vel  quotiens  siccari  coeperit  mutanda  erit;  Plin. 
Epp.  6,  2,  7  equidem  quotiens  iudico,  quod  vel  saepius  facio,  quam 
dico,  quantum  quis  plurimum  postnlat  aquae  do.  Similarly  Cic. 
ad  Fam.  6,  5,  1  quotienscunque  filiurn  tuum  video  (video  autem 
fere  quotidie) ;  ibid.  13,  41,  1  turn  Pompeius,  quotienscunque  me 
videt  (videt  autem  saepe),  while  in  13,  69,  1  Apud  eum  ego  sic 
Ephesi  fui,  quotienscunque  fui,  tamquam  domi  meae  even  the 
opposite  of  frequency  seems  to  be  denoted. 

The  idea  of  frequency  may  be  added  by  the  use  of  a  frequenta- 

1  Agricola,  Brunsvigae,  1852,  Prolegom.  p.  164. 

'Agricola,  1864,  ad  loc. 

'Annotations  in  Corn.  Taciti  Agricolam,  Gottingae,  1871,  p.  18. 

4  Zur  Erklarung  d.  Tac.  Agrik.  1874,  p.  7. 


22  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

live  verb,  but  classical  examples  are  wanting  and  in  the  later  ones 
the  frequentative  force  has  often  faded.  Cf.  Tac.  Ann.  6,  21,  1 
Quotiens  super  tali  negotio  consultaret,  edita  domus  parte  .  .  . 
utebatur;  13, 18, 16  quotiens  ipse  illuc  ventitaret ;  Ammian.  Marc. 
20,  11,  9;  Cypr.  Gall.  Exod.  769;  991;  Ennod.  C.  2,  121,  1. 
That  quotiens  should  often  be  found  where  cum,  quando,  ubi, 
utcunque,  etc.,  could  be  used  and  v.  v.  was  to  be  expected  in  a  live 
language.  Compare  Paul  us,  Digest.  I,  5,  7  qui  in  utero  est  .  .  . 
quotiens  (=cum,  quando)  de  commodis  ipsius  partus  quaeritur 
with  id.  L,  16,  231  tune  verum  est,  cum  de  ipsius  iure  quaeritur. 
Often  these  are  parallel  in  a  single  passage  to  give  variety.  Cf. 
Valer.  Flacc.  6,  683 

At  quotiens  vis  dura  ducum  densique  repente 
Aesoniden  pressere  viri  cumque  omnis  in  unum 
imber  iit,  totiens  saxis  pulsatur  et  hastis ; 

Plin.  N.  H.  18,  323  quotiens  at  occidente  sole  cernetur  .  .  . 
crescens  erit  .  .  .,  cum  vero  occidente  sole  orieturet  adverse  .  .  .  turn 
erit  plenilunium;  Ulp.  Digest.  L,  16,  38  duo  genera  autem  sunt 
ostentorum  :  unum,  quotiens  quid  contra  naturam  nascitur;  alte- 
rum,  cum  quid  prodigiosum  videtur ;  Diom.  I  (K.)  309,  1  quintus, 
quotiens  in  o  exeunt  femina  (cf.  with  tertius,  cum,  supra) ;  Serv. 
on  JEn.  9,  192  poscere  est  secundum  Yarronem  quotiens  aliquid 
pro  merito  nostro  deposcimus,  petere  vero  est  cum  aliquid  humiliter 
et  cum  precibus  postulamus.  In  Marcell.  p.  311,  22  (Helmr.) 
hoc  .  .  .  remedium  ...  ad  alios  trauslatnm,  cum  volueris  et 
quotiens  volueris,  proderit  each  word  has  its  proper  force. 

On  the  other  hand,  compare  e.  g.  Porph.  on  Hor.  Epod.  17,  52 
utcunque  autem  *  quotienscunque '  significat;  Serv.  -ZEn.  1,  412 
figura  est  tmesis,  quae  fit  cum  secto  uno  sermone  aliquid  interponi- 
mus  (^En.  1,  77  figura  est  litotes,  quae  fit  quotienscunque,  etc., 
.ZEn.  1,  435  est  translatio,  quae  fit  quotiens,  etc.) ;  and  compare 
further  Serv.  ^ZEn.  1,  119  cum  provinciam  dicimus  .  .  .  et  princi- 
pale  est  nomen,  brevis  est  '  Tro/  quando  autem  non  est  principale 
et  derivatio  est,  longa  est  'Tro'  with  ibid.  3,  384  ut  quotienscunque 
Sicilia  significatur,  Trinacria  totum  per  *  r y  dicatur,  quotiens 
Sicula,  per  unam  'r.'  In  1,  41  cum  and  quotiens  are  again 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  23 

parallel :  media  producitur  syllaba,  sed  cum  opus  est  corripitur 
hac  excusatione :  nam  quotiens  vocalem  longam  vocalis  sequitur, 
ei  vires  detrahit. 

Note. — The  phrase  cum  opus  erit  (fuerit)  is  especially  common 
in  the  directions  of  Marcell.  Cf.  p.  288,  27  (Helmr.) ;  362,  17; 
364,  5  ;  1 7  ;  369,  13 ;  375,  22  ;  376,  36  ;  379,  31,  though  quotiens 
opus  fuerit  occurs  p.  149,  26;  281,  18-19  (cf.  281,  14;  q.  fuerit 
necessarium).  The  phrase  is  frequent  in  other  writers,  cf.  q.  opus 
est,  Ovid,  A.  A.  1,  430 ;  3,  641 ;  Luc.  6,  560 ;  Sen.  de  Ira  1,  9,  1 ; 
de  Ben.  2,  34,  2  ;  Frontin.  Aq.  14  (cf.  q.  necesse  est  Sen.  Phoeniss. 
493)  ;  q.  opus  fuerit,  Curt.  10,  6,  15  ;  q.  o.  sit,  Plin.  N.  H.  17,  129  ; 
34,  122;  q.  o.  esset,  Sueton.  Galba  10 ;  quotienscunque  opus  erit, 
Cato,  Agri  Cult.  151,  4;  Cic.  de  Orat.  3,  123;  quotienscunque 
opus  fuerit,  Vitruv.  5, 1 2, 4 ;  quotiensque  opus  esset,  Sueton.  Aug.  37. 

In  the  Jurists  Kalb1  notes  that  for  a  certain  period,  especially 
in  Africanus,  Gaius  and  Marcell  us,  who  belong  to  the  reigns  of 
Antoninus  Pius  and  Marcus  Aurelius,  quotiens  is  given  up  and 
cum  and  other  substitutes  are  used.  Cf.  for  example  Gaius,  Inst. 
4,  3  in  rem  actio  est,  cum  .  .  .  rem  intendimus  nostram  esse  with 
Ulp.  Digest.  II,  14,  7,  8  (pacta)  in  rem  sunt,  quotiens  general iter 
pacisoor  ne  petam.  Gaius,  however,  shows  two  examples  1,  162; 
4,  2,  though  the  text  is  uncertain  in  the  latter.  Kalb  offers  no 
explanation  (deren  Gruud  wir  uicht  finden  konnten),  but  as  the 
later  Jurists  make  frequent  use  of  quotiens  for  si  and  cum,  it  is 
evident  that  they  were  under  the  influence  of  the  same  loose  usage 
cited  above,  while  Gaius  writing  his  own  lectures  made  nicer 
distinction.2 

AUTHORS   EXAMINED.3 

Plautus,  Ennius,  Terence,  Cato,  Lucilius,  Auct.  ad  Heren.,  Lucre- 
tius, Catullus,  Csesar,  Hirtius,  Nepos,  Cicero,  Publilius  Syrus,  Sal- 

1  Roms  Juristen  nach  ihrer  Sprache  dargestellt,  Leipz.  1890,  p.  31. 

2  Cf.  the  suggestion  of  Prof.  Wolff.,  abstract,  p.  398. 

3  Editions  are  regularly  indicated  in  the  citations  that  are  made  by  page  and 
line,  and  in  other  cases  where  pertinent  variants  are  found.     The  Teubner  texts 
are  usually  taken  as  the  basis.     The  grammarians  are  naturally  cited  from  Keil's 
Corpus  Grammaticorum  and  patristic  writers  from  the  Corpus  Vindobonense, 
unless  otherwise  indicated. 


24  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

lust,  Varro, Vergil,  Tibullus,  Propertius,  Livy,  Hyginus,Vitruvius, 
Horace  (Porph.),  Auct.  Bell.  Afr.,  Manillas,  Seneca  Rhetor,  Ovid, 
Valerius  Maxiruus  (Epit.  Par.),  Veil.  Paterculus,  Phaedrus,  Mela, 
Columella,  Curtius,  Celsus,  Scribonius  Largus,  Petronius,  Calp. 
Siculus,  Nemesianus,  Persius,  Probus,  Lucan,  Seneca  Phil.,  Valer. 
Flaccus,  Plin.  Mai.,  Quintilian,  Pseud. -Quintil.,  Statins,  Hygiu. 
Grom.,  Caper,  Vel.  Longus,  Silius  Italicus,  Frontinus,  Martial, 
Plin.  Min.,  Tacitus,  Juvenal,  Florus,  Terent.  Scaurus,  Justinus, 
Suetonius,  Apuleius,  Fronto,  Gellius,  Gaius,  Min.  Felix,  Ampelius, 
Licinianus,  Tertullian  (Vol.  I  Reiff.-Wiss.),  Censorinus,  Com- 
ruodianus,  Cyprian,  Solinus,  Jul.  Valerius,  Terent.  Maurus,  Arno- 
bius,  Plotius,  Publil.  Optatianus,  Palladius,  Atil.  Fortunatianus, 
Scriptores  Hist.  Aug.,  Lactantius,  Juvencus,  Firm.  Maternus, 
Plin.  (Medicus),  Mar.  Victorinus,  Aurel.  Victor,  Obsequens, 
Charisius,  Diornedes,  Eutropius,  Dictys  Cretensis,  Vegetius,  Au- 
sonius,  St.  Silvia,  Auctor  Queroli,  Prudentius,  Amm.  Marcellinus, 
Macrobius,  Marcellus  Empir.,  Orosius,  Rufinus,  Symmachus, 
Hieronymus,  Mall.  Theodorus,  Servius  (Commentaries  on  Verg.), 
Claud.  Claudianus,  Pelagonius,  Sulpicius  Severus,  Mart.  Capella, 
Augustinus  (C.  D.  only),  Salvianus,  Cassius  Felix,  Sedulius,  Claud. 
Mamertus,  Faustus  Reiensis,  Ruricius,  Lucifer  Cal.,  Sid.  Apol- 
linaris,  Agroecius,  Victor  Vitensis,  Dares  Phrygius,  Priscian, 
Engippius  (Vit.  S.  Sever.),  Boethius,  Ennodius,  Fulgentius,  Di- 
gesta  Justiniani,  Jordanis,  Cyprian.  Gall.,  Cassiodor(i)us,  Gregory 
of  Tours. 


V 

On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  25 


PART  II. 


CITATION   OF   EXAMPLES.1 

QUOTIENS. 

A.  EXCLAMATORY :  INDICATIVE,  Present— Cic.  ad  Att. 
7,  26,  1;  TIBUM,.  2,  3,  17;  PROPERT.  1,  10,  4;  18,  21; 
OVID,  A.  A.  2,  447;  567;  Trist.  3,  12,  25;  SEN.  Here.  O. 
93 ;  SIL.  ITAL.  13,  667  ;  MART.  10,  51, 15  ;  CLAUDIAN.  de  Rapt. 
Proserp.  3,  126;  127;  ENNOD.  p.  15,  19  (Hartel).— Imperfect— 
TEB.  Hec.  60;  SEN.  Here.  O.  1914;  Sit.  ITAI-.  6,  584;  SID. 
APOIX.  Epp.  1,  7,  2. — Future — PBOPERT.  1,  5, 13 ;  SEN.  Controv. 
9,  5, 1  ;  OVID,  Her.  15,  81 ;  SIL.  ITAL.  13,  866  ;  MART.  11, 16,  5 ; 
CLAUDIAN.  de  Nupt.  Honor.  4, 14  ;  de  Consul.  Stil.  2,  398  ;  404.— 
Perfect — CATO,  in  Sulpic.  p.  62,  1  (Jordan);  Cic.  Mil.  5,  12; 

7,  20;    14,  38;    15,  41;    Cat.   1,   6,  15  (bis);   16  (bis);    Phil. 
2,  18,  45  (bis);  Marc.  6,  16;  Dom.  23,  59;  Font.  7,  16;  Arch. 

8,  18  (ter);  Tusc.  1,  89;  Div.  1,  97;  Cat.  Mai.  49  (bis) ;  VERG. 
Eel.  3,  72 ;  Ge.  1,  471 ;  Ciris  81  ;  82 ;  TIBDUL.  1,  3,  19 ;  9,  17  ; 
41  ;  2,  3,  19  ;  6,  13  ;  PROPERT.  3,  31, 11 ;  4, 14,  13 ;  15  ;  5,  7,  17  ; 
LIVY  7,  29,  2;  39,  16,  8;  40,  8,  11;  SEN.  Controv.  9,  6,  20; 
OVID,  Her.  5,  49;  51;  9,  79;  15,  135;  137;  16,  81  (bis);  Am. 
1,  13,  27;  29;  2,  19,  11;  13;  3,  1,  53;  A.  A.  1,  313;  321; 
2, 125  ;  3,  481 ;  Nux  160  ;  161 ;  Met.  2, 489  ;  491 ;  3,  375 ;  427  ; 
428;   10,  661;    14,  643;   15,  490;   492;   Trist.  1,  3,  51;    53; 
ex  Pont.  1,  1,  7;    1,  9,  21;    23;    4,  1,  9;   11;  VAIER.  MAX. 

9,  3,  5;   CURT.  10,  5,  35   (bis);   CAM>.  Sic.  Eel.   7,  69;  Luc. 
5,    615;    SEN.    Epp.   10,    2,   14   (bis);   de   Rem.    Fort.    16,    5; 
Here.  F.  21;   Here.  O.  1912;  VALER.  FLACC.  1,447;  2,  53;  4, 

1  Authors  are  arranged  in  an  approximately  chronological  order,  with  certain 
exceptions  (e.  g.  the  Jurists)  for  convenience  in  grouping.  Convenience  is  fol- 
lowed also  in  designating  but  few  pseudos. 

Tenses  are  contemporary  unless  otherwise  indicated  in  the  classification. 


26  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

378;  PSEFD.-QUINTIL.  p.  281,  12  (Ritter);  352,  16;  STAT.  Silv. 
1,  2,  93;  5,  5, 38;  Theb.  5,  615;  Sir,.  ITAI,.  7, 152;  MART.  9,  84,  7 ; 
14,  115,  2;  119,  2;  PJLIN.  Pan.  15  (bis);  SUETON.  de  Vir.  111. 
p.  44,  6  (Reiff.) ;  FI,AV.  VOPISC.  Prob.  12,  6 ;  PRUD.  Psych.  899 
(bis);  CI<AUDIAN.  in  Eutrop.  1,  35;  Epith.  de  Nupt.  Honor.  81; 
Pan.  Manl.  Theod.  54;  de  Consul.  Stil.  1,  122;  233;  3,  184; 
185;  de  Rapt.  Proserp.  1,  192;  193;  AUGUST.  Civ.  Dei  3,  18 
init. ;  19  init. ;  SALVIAN.  p.  39,11  (Pauly);  SID.  APOLI,.  Carm. 
23,  233 ;  ENNOD.  Carra.  1,  8,  39  ;  41 ;  2, 140,  1  ;  BOETH.  Consol. 

1,  4,  29  (p.  11,  29  Peip.);  31;  32;  GREG.  TUR.  Hist.  Franc.  5 
prol.  init. 

INFINITIVE,  Perfect— L.IVY  25,  16,  12;  30,  21,  7;  TAC.  Ann. 
3,  34,  27. 

B.  INTERROGATIVE  :  INDICATIVE,  Present— PI.AUT. 
Amph.  619;  Cure.  609;  Most.  948;  SERV.  Sctp.  apud  Cic.  ad 
Fam.  4,  5,  3;  L.IVY  34,  12,  8;  SEN.  Controv.  10,  4,  22;  OVID, 
Trist.  5,  6,  25  ;  L.UC.  8,  408  ;  SEN.  Dial.  10,  5, 1 ;  Nat.  Quaest.  3, 
17,  2  ;  STAT.  Theb.  2,  337  ;  HYGIN,  GROM.  36  ;  TERTUIX.  p.  395, 
1  (Reiff.-Wiss.  1);  3;  AUSON.  p.  120,  43  (Peiper).— Imperfect— 
VARRO,  Menipp.  186  (Buech.) ;  SEN.  Here.  O.  212.— Future- 
Cm.  Verr.  2,  59,  145;  HOR.  Carm.  1,  5,  5;  OVID,  Her.  16, 
217.— Perfect— PLAUT.  Asin.  522;  Men.  784;  788;  Mil.  Glor. 
1057  ;  Cic.  ad  Att.  12,  6,  2  ;  MANIL.  1,  509  ;  SEN.  Controv.  2,  7, 
5  (bis);  SEN.  Epp.  14,  3,  9  (quater) ;  19,  1,  3  (bis);  MART.  11, 
43,  3;  FRONTO,  ad  Ver.  Imp.  2,  8;  CYPR.  p.  44,  15  (Hartel) ; 
App.  120,  17;  Carm.  6,  278;  279;  ARNOB.  p.  271,  16  (Reiff.); 
AMM.  MARC.  20,  5,  4 ;  SYM.  Epp.  10,  9,  6  ;  ENNOD.  p.  9,  22 ; 
310,  8;  9;  364,  6;  7;  372,  2;  3;  22;  395,  8;  426,  26;  27; 
470,  21;  22;  26;  479,  27;  491,  13;  17.— Pluperfect— ENNOD. 
p.  480,  1. 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Present — Cic.  Div.  in  Caecil.  14,  45;  LIVY 
5,  52,  9;  SEN.  Controv.  7,  8,  8 ;  OVID,  Her.  18,  31;  CELS. 

2,  14    fin.;    AUCT.    AETNAE    88;   PUN.    Nat.    Hist.    22,    107; 
STAT.  Theb.  7,  201 ;  MART.  9,  35,  7  ;  Juv.  3,  270 ;  APUL.  Apol. 
38  ;  TERENT.  MAUR.  VI  (K.)  Met.  2873  ;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.) 
72,  17  ;  AUSON.  p.  180,  10  (Peiper).— Imperfect—  Jut.  CAP.  Opil. 

1  Parallel  with  quam  saepe ;  cf.  Part  I,  p.  20  f. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  27 

Macr.  3, 1.— Perfect.— CATO,  Orig.  4, 1,  (bis) ;  JLIVY  26, 13,  6 ;  34,  5, 
3;  35,18,7;  38,47, 12  (bis);  MANIL.  1,513;  SEN.  Controv.  2, 1 ,  8 ; 
OVID,  Am.  2,  8,  27 ;  3,  8,  21  ;  Met.  7,  734 ;  735 ;  VEM,.  PATERC. 

2,  42,  2  ;   SEN.  Dial.  4,  28,  6  ;   5,  25,  2  ;  PSEUD-QUINTS  p. 
16,  12  (Ritter);  STAT.  Theb.  8,  510;  TAC.  Hist.  4,  58,  9;  Ann. 

3,  6,  10;  APUI-.  Apol.  73;  TERTUUL.   p.  61,  4  (Reiff.-Wiss.  1); 
TERENT.  MAUR.   VI  (K.)  Met.   2668;    Jui,.  CAP.   Opil.  Macr. 
1,  4;  ARNOB.  p.  6,  26;  LACT.  p.  589,  2  (Laub.-Brandt  1);  3; 
FI.AV.  VOPISC.   Prob.  6,  1;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  161,  13; 
AUCT.  QUEROI,.  p.   11,  4   (Peiper);  CLAUDIAN.  Cons.   Olyb.  et 
Prob.  58;  ENNOD.  p.  364,  2.— Pluperfect— Caes.  B.  G.   1,  43,  7; 
B.  C.  3,  72,  4  ;  Cic.  Cat.  3,  5,  11 ;  SAIX.  Hist.  Fragg.  3,  48,  1 
(Maur.);  LIVY  23,  15,  12;  34,  20,  6;  35,  33,  4;  PHAED.  App. 

9,  27,  6;  JUSTIN.  13,  1,  3;  TERTUM,.  p.  61,  16  (Reiff.-Wiss.  1). 
INFINITIVE,  Perfect — L.IVY  33,  12,  8. 

C.  RELATIVE:  INDICATIVE,  Present— PI.AUT.  Epid.  175; 
Men.  114;  True.  196;  Lucir.  9,  34  (M.  =  911  Baehr.) ;  Cic. 
Orat.  Ill;  Fin.  5,  63;  VERG.  ^En.  4,  351;  352;  VITRUT. 

5,  8,  2  ;  HOR.  Carm.  4,  2,  26  ;  Epp.  1,18,  104 ;  2, 1,  55  ;  (PORPH. 
Sat.  2,  1,  22;  Epp.  1,  18,  104);  MANII,.   1,  700;  SEN.  Controv. 
1,  2,  15;  2,  5,  11;  3,  5  fin.;  OVID,  Her.  12,  190;   18,  180;  19, 
190 ;  A.  A.  1,  430 ;  2,  613  ;  3,  641 ;  Met.  4,  587  ;  6,  481 ;  Fast. 

1,  573 ;  Trist.  1,  7,  9  ;  2, 1,  33 ;  4,  7,  7  ;  ex  Pont.  1,  2, 122 ;  2,  1, 
13 ;  9,  16 ;  3,  1,  61  ;  Cot.  4,  32,  5 ;  12,  12,  1 ;  CEI.S.  1,  9  init. ; 

2,  16  fin.;  2,  17  init.;  4,  26  fin.;  31  med. ;  5,  19,  24;  26,  24; 

6,  15  med.;   18,  2  fin.;  7,  2  med. ;  C  ALP.  Sic.  2,  85;   5,  53; 

7,  21;  Luc.  1,  256;  3,  469;  549;  6,  560;  9,  404;  SEN.  Epp. 
2,  7,1;  4,  5,1;  6,  4,  8;  7,  3,  17;  13,  2,4;  18,  2,  8;  5,  24; 
20,    5,    14;    Dial    1,  -4,    5 ;    3,    9,   1 ;    de   Clem.   1,   12,   1;    de 
Ben.  2,  10,  4;  31,  2;  34,  2;  7,  23,  1;  Nat.  Quaest.  1,  5,  6  ; 
12,  1 ;  2,  58,  1 ;  3  praef.  4;  3,  30,  3;  6,  6,  4;  9,  3;  VAI.ER.  FLACC. 
<8,  364;  PWN.  Nat.  Hist.  17,  104;  18,  277;  22,  123;  QUINTII,. 
Inst.  Orat.  1,  6,  29 ;  2,  16,  10 ;  3,  6,  27 ;  95 ;  4,  1,  46  ;  2,  41  ; 
5,  26;  6,2,  14;  7,  8,  7;  8,3,  56;  82;  5,21;  6,  59;  9,  2,  7; 
27;  34;  3,  75;  76;  4,40;  67;  10,3,27;  11,3,102;  12,  1,29; 

10,  27;  29;  PSEUD. -QUINT,  p.   15,  18  (Ritter);  40,  7;  75,  13; 
S9,  18;  90,  24;  26;  124,  12;  141,  16;  17;  210,  17;  228,  8; 
259,  7;    326,  5;   358,  28;  STAT.  Silv.  3  praef.;   2,  37;  Theb. 


28  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

6,  11  ;  685 ;  HYGIN.  GROM.  2  ;  40  ;  43 ;  52 ;  VEI»  LONG.  VII  (K.) 
60,  17  ;  63,  6 ;  66,  4  ;  72,  2  ;  81,7;  Sir,.  ITAL.  1,  266  ;  3,  410  ; 
12,  145;  FRONTIN.  Strut.  1,  11,  17;  Aq.  11;  14;  15;  28;  35 
(bis)1;  112  (bis);  MART.  1,  117,  1  ;  2,  14,  2  ;  5,  18,  9  ;  50,  1  ; 
52,  3 ;  6,  36,  2 ;  93,  8 ;  7,  35,  2 ;  8,  55,  2 ;  76,  4 ;  10,  80,  1  ; 
11,  7,  13;  99,  1;  102,  5;  12,  56,  3;  13,  70,  1;  101,  2;  PLIN, 
Epp.  1,  22,  2;  6,  2,  7;  9,  36,  2;  TAC.  Dial.  23,  23; 
24;  Agric.  30,  1;  Germ.  15,  1;  Hist.  1,  37,  10;  Ann.  4,  1, 
19;  6,  11,  16;  42,  4;  Juv.  2,  2;  156;  3,  306;  5,  28;  6,  67; 
180;  194;  535;  647;  7,  179;  9,  51;  111;  14,  21;  TERENT. 
SCAUR.  VII  (K,)  16,  1 ;  23,  6  ;  29,  4 ;  6 ;  15  ;  SUETON.  de 
Vir.  111.  p.  118,  5  (Reiff.);  140,  14;  22;  141,  3;  Praturn 
211,  11 ;  GAIUS  4,  2;  MIN.  FEL.  p.  40,  8  (Halm);  TERTUIX.  p. 
66, 12  (R.-W.  1) ;  107,  8  ;  10  ;  221, 15  ;  CYPR.  p.  801, 18  ;  App.  p. 
31,2;  33,6;  35,15;  39,1;  239,9;  SOLIN.  p.  221,  15  (Mommsen.); 
16;  Jut.  VAI.ER.  Ep.  Alex,  ad  Dind.  p.  170,  9  (Kuebler) ; 
TERENT.MAUR.Vi(K.)Lit.l42;172;  220;  Syl. 792;  1011 ;  1128; 
1207;  1273;  Met,  1523;  1840;  1849;  1992;  2749;  PALLAD.  1, 
28,2;  3,25,22;  4,9,8;  10,10,3;  LACT.  p.  140,  6  (L.-B.  1);  170, 
18  ;  207,  7;  496,  21 ;  532,  12;  693,  2 ;  JUVENC.  3,  224;  MAR. 
VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  10,  10;  15,8;  17,9;  19,6;  23,7;  33,8;  61, 
6;  83,12;  107,  20;  2l  (bis);  163,  11;  12;  Ars  195,  21;  22; 
23;  199,  14;  202,  14;  204,  4;  5;  de  Rat.  Met.  Com.  217,  17; 
CHARIS,  I  (K.)  8,  18  (bis);  85,13;  173,9;  227,3;  10;  12;  30; 
228,  1;  9;  16  (bis);  22;  233,  4;  10;  11;  234,  3;  235,  25; 
236,  1;  DIOM.  I  (K.)  308,  31;  33;  35;  309,  1;  27;  322,  11; 
372,  7  ;  9  ;  25  (bis) ;  378,  8  ;  391,  20 ;  21 ;  332,  6  ;  28  ;  393,  8  ; 
10;  394,  1;  3;  12;  20;  23;  27;  29;  397, 16 ;  405,  20;  406,  5; 
11;  12;  427,  17;  21;  26;  434,  13;  446,  17;  448,  14;  478, 
3;  480,  6;  9;  494,  32;  495,  9;  15;  VEGET.  2,  22  (quater);  3, 
5  fin. ;  4,  21 ;  AUSON.  p.  14,  vs.  12  (Peip.);  17,  31 ;  92,  19 ;  21  ; 
228,  43;  253,  33;  286,  24;  354,  34;  370,  433;  AUCT. 
QUEROI,.  p.  37,  12  (Peip.);  PRUDENT.  Apoth.  838;  Ham.  87; 
Psych.  7;  713;  cont.  Sym.  2,  312;  1097;  AMM,  MARC.  17,  5, 
14;  MACROB.  Sat.  1,  24,  4 ;  4,  6,  9 ;  5,  15,  6 ;  Som.  Scip.  1,  6, 
66;  21,  5;  SYM.  Epp.  1,  37,  1  ;  84;  2,  91;  3,  32;  80;  9,  69; 

1  ducitur  scripsi,  Buech. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  29 

80;  SERV.  Eel.  3,  28;  9,  54;  Ge.  2,  477;  Aen.  1,  23;  41 ;  65; 
108  (bis);  159;  208;  209;  228;  251;  257;  332;  343;  371 
(bis) ;  384 ;  423 ;  435  ;  436  (bis) ;  451  ;  532  ;  744  ;  2,  270 ; 
300;  3,  205;  275;  384;  4,  418;  5,533;  7,  8;  8,12;  110; 
168;  209;  268;  9,  81;  192;  360;  452;  10,  33;  74;  419; 
668;  11,  284  (bis);  463;  551;  593;  659;  12,  164;  575; 
CLAUDIAN.  in  Rufin.  2,  114;  in  Eutrop.  1,  239;  241;  2,  404; 
446;  de  iv  Consul.  Honor.  523;  563;  Pan.  Manl.  Theod.  100; 
de  Cons.  Stil.  3,  362;  de  Rapt.  Proserp.  1,  157;  2,  63;  MART. 
CAPELL.  3,  251;  302;  308  (bis);  311;  5,  534;  535;  7,  769; 
781;  785  (ter);  786;  SAI.VIAN.  p.  151,  27;  152,  26;  FAUST. 
p.  236,  22  (Engelbr.) ;  263, 17  ;  264,  8  ;  292,  6  ;  300, 19  ;  308,  27  ; 
LUCIF.  p.  268,  22  (Hartel) ;  293, 15  ;  SID.  APOIX.  Epp.  2,  6,  1 ;  3, 
10,  1;  5,  5,  3;  6,  8,  1;  7,  14,  11;  15,  1;  8,  11,13;  14,4  (bis); 
5;  6;  9,  16,3;  Carrn.  2,  112;  308;  5,52;  198;  406;  22,35; 
VICT.  VIT.  p.  40,  5  (Petschen.);  83,  9;  PRISC.  n  (K.)  197, 10;  303, 
6  ;  m,  19,  9  ;  127,  12  ;  142, 17  ;  252,  4  ;  338,  15 ;  BOETH.  Arith.  1, 
24  (p.  49,  16  Fried.);  29  (61,  2);  31  (65/2);  2,  29  (120,  14);  40 
(138,  1);  51  (165,  23);  52  (167,  21);  Mns.  1,  3  (190,  8);  24 
(217,  6);  25  (218,  3);  28  (220,  3);  2,  13  (243,  5);  30  (263,  23); 
Geom.  p.  379,  23  ;  Consol.  1,  2  (p.  6,  vs.  4  Peip.) ;  4  (p.  10,  vs.  7)  ; 
4  (p.  14,  110);  2,  6  (p.  43,  vs.  16);  4,  7  (p.  118,  38);  Trin.  p. 
149,  6;  ENNOD.  p.  19,  12;  20,  20;  22,  15;  30,  14;  40, 
15;  61,  1;  92,  17;  97,  9;  102,  14;  107,4;  110,24;  133,  24; 
160,7;  162,10;  176,13;  178,10;  254,23;  268,  9;  269,  18; 
274,5;  305,13;  392,4;  414,17;  430,2;  436,4;  446,4;  454, 
6;  18;  Carm.  1,  6,  praef.  (521,  14) ;  6,2;  7,41;  9,72;  158;  2, 
56,  10;  69,  2;  80,  7;  121, 1 ;  148, 1 ;  DIGEST.  Scaev.  xxxv  2,  23; 
Lab.  xvn,  2,  84 ;  xxxvn,  10,  9  ;  Javol.  xvni,  1,  65 ;  Julian,  ix, 
4,  34  ;  xn,  1,19  praef. ;  vol.  xxxv,  1,  24 ;  Pomp.  I,  2,  2,  33  (bis) ; 
Viii,  1,15;  xxxii.  85  praef. ;  xxxiv,  3,  8,  3  ;  L,  17,  20  ;  Yenul. 
xxi,  1,  65,  1  ;  Callist.  I,  18,  9 ;  IV,  2,  13 ;  Paul.  I,  5,  7 ;  n,  8,  6 ; 
xxi,  2;  L,  17,  136;  Ulp.  n,  14,  7,  8  (bis);  iv,  6,  26,  9;  XLIII, 
8,  2,  10 ;  L,  16,  38  ;  Modest,  xxvm,  5,  63,  1 ;  XLI,  1,  52 ;  Herm. 
I,,  17,  98  ;  CYPR.  GAUL.  Gen.  687 ;  Exod.  450 ;  631  ;  769  ;  991 ; 
Num.  105;  Deut.  69;  130;  Jes.  Nav.  533;  Jud.  330;  CASSIOD. 
Vii  (K.)  161,15;  24;  162,7;  163,  18.— Imperfect—  CURT.  10,1, 


30  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

28  ;  4,  3  ;  SEN.  Epp.  18, 1,  33  ;J  Apocol.  15  ;  VEL.  LONG,  vn  (K.) 
60,  12;  70,  16;  17;  FBONTTN.  Aq.  95;  PLIN.  Epp.  1,  2,  4; 
TEBENT.  SCAUR.  VII  (K.)  14,  6 ;  15,  4;  CHAKIS.  I  (K.)  '217,  11  ; 
229,  3;  AMM.  MABC.  20,  11,  9;  SEBV.  Aen.  1,  65;  3,  57;  175; 
5,  95;  9,  624;  638;  CLAUDIAN.  de  Bell.  Poll.  377;  Laus  Ser. 
134  ENNOD.  p.  338,  4. — 'Future—  CATO,  Agr.  Cult.  59;  Cic. 
ad  Fam.  1,  7,  1;  ad  Alt.  11,  13,  5;  PBOPEBT.  3,  8,  56; 
12,  27;  4,  6,  73;  HOB.  Epp.  1,  18,  45;  SEN.  Controv.  2,  5,  11  ; 
9,  5,  4  (bis);  OVID,  Her.  13,  69;  A.  A.  2,  327;  395;  CELS.  5, 
26,  22;  SEN.  Epp.  2,  1,  13;  4,  6,  4;  8,  2,  2 ;  12,  18,  9; 
Dial.  4,  34,  4 ;  7,  26,  7 ;  de  Clem.  2,  6,  3 ;  de  Ben.  4,  7,  1 ;  Nat. 
Quaest.  1  prolog.  10 ;  2,  34,  3  ;  de  Mor.  130 ;  PLIN.  Nat.  Hist.  18r 
323  (bis);  QUINTIL.  1,  11,  8;  2,  13,  3  (bis);  3,  7,  24;  4,  1,  72; 
2,26;  5,  17;  7,2,36;  4,31:  5,  3 ;  6,  9 ;  10,1,22;  7,29;  11, 
1,  9 ;  PSEUD.-QITINTIL.  p.  7,  4  (Ritter) ;  70,  5 ;  STAT.  Theb.  4, 
505;  Achill.  1,  909;  Sit.  ITAL.  15,  113;  MABT.  11,  7,  2;  14, 
7,  2;  PUN.  Epp.  6,  12,  5;  Pan.  67;  TAC.  Hist.  3,  51,  13;  Jcv. 
3,  318  ;  APUL.  Met.  2,  3 ;  26  ;  TEBENT.  MAIJB.  VI  (K.)  Syl.  1234  ; 
Met.  1566 ;  1837  ;  PALLAD.  3,  24,  11  ;  MAB.  VICTOBIN.  VI  (K.) 
10, 11  ;  18,  18  ;  19,  20 ;  MABCELL.  p.  298, 17  (Helmr.) ;  324,  16  ; 
342, 15  ;  SEDUL.  p.  313,  vs.  73  (Huemer) ;  SID.  APOLL.  Epp.  9, 13, 
3. — Perfect,  (a)  Contemporary— Gw.  Quinct.  19,  62  ;  Balb.  20,  47  ; 
SALL.  Hist.  Fragg.  2,  98, 1  (Maur.)  ;  PBOPEBT.  1,  3,  27  ;  16,  43  ; 
HOB.  Carm.  4,  9,  40 ;  SEN.  Controv.  3,  8  (ter) ;  OVID,  Rem.  Am. 
304 ;  VALEB.  MAX.  8,  10,  1  ;  CUBT.  6,  10,  35 ;  CELS.  2,  12  fin. ; 
SEN.  Epp.  2,  1,  2 ;  Dial.  2,  8,  3 ;  de  Ben.  2,  11,  2 ;  Medea  433 ; 
PLIN.  Nat.  Hist,  7,  157  ;  MABT.  4,  66, 12  ;  PLIN.  Pan.  58  ;  TAC. 
Agric.  1,  3;  Ann.  1,  56,  17;  GELL.  19,  8,  1;  CYPB.  Carm.  6, 
258;  JUL.  CAPITOL.  Ver.  5,  3;  MAB.  VICTOBIN.  VI  (K.)  12, 
9;  PBFD.  Apoth.  191;  cont.  Sym.  2,  547;  Perist.  4,  81;  11, 
178;  AMM.  MABC.  16,  5,  5;  SYM.  Epp.  1,  2,  7;  CLAUDIAN.  de 
Bell.  Poll.  Ill  ;  SULP.  SEVEB.  p.  169,  25  (Halm)  ;  MABT.  CAPELL. 
1,  37;  L.UCIF.  p.  4,  16;  154,  19;  SID.  APOLL.  Carm.  5, 
113;  BOETH.  Consol.  4,7  (p.  118,  39  Peip.);  DIGEST.  Pedius 
apud  Ulp.  I,  3.  13;  Ulp.  VII,  2,  1 ;  4,  3  praef. ;  EUGIPP.  p.  5,  19 

1  fuerat  =  erat,  cf.  Blase,  Geschichte  des  Plusquamperfekts  im  Lateinischen, 
Giessen,  1894,  p.  48. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  31 

(Knoell).— (b)  Prior— PROPERT.  3,  9,  3 ;  SEN.  Controv.  10,  6,  2; 
OVID,  Her.  13,  51  ;  CELS.  3,  16  init. ;  4,  22  init. ;  23  med.;  6, 
18,  3;  9  fin.;  7,  29  fin.;  8,  10,  2  fin.;  PETRON.  90;  SEN.  Epp. 

5,  1,  18 ;  6,  4,  1  ;  9,  5,  4  ;  10,  1,  2 ;  14,  4,  17 ;  15,  2,  73 ;  18,  5, 
8;    19,   1,   17;    20,  2,   1;    Dial   3,   12,   1;    9,   11,    8;    12,   12, 
4;  de  Clem.  1,  6,  1 ;  Nat.  Quaest.  2,  59,  11 ;  PMN.  Nat.  Hist.  2, 
106;   11,   209;   15,  134;   17,  40;   18,   146;   34,   108;    35,   44; 
QUINTIL.  2,  14,  1;  10,  4,  3;  6,  1;  11,1,16;  3,120;  PSEUD.- 
QUINTII,.  p.  18,  15  (Hitter);  46,  14;  63,  26;  166,5;  246,24; 
307,  12;   STAT.    Theb.  10,924;  VEI,.  LONG.  VII  (K.)   55,  17; 
MART.  1,  105,  2 ;  5,  7,  2 ;  47,  2 ;  7,  18,  5;  76,  3 ;  9,  25,  1;  10, 
42,  5;  11,  102,  8;  12,  29,  18;  57,  28;  13,  18,  2;  Juv.  1,  165; 
3,  40 ;  JUSTIN.  14,  4,  7 ;  CYPR.  App.  p.  239,  10 ;  243,  9 ;  Carm. 

6,  282;  AUSON.  p.  285,  15  (Peiper) ;  CI,AUDIAN.  de  Cons.  Stil.  3, 
60;  331;  KuRic.p.  403, 16  (Engelbr.);  DIGEST.  Ulp.  II,  14,  7, 16  ; 
IV,  6,  26,  8;  xr,  7,  22;  CYPR.  GAIX.  Levit.  178.— Pluperfect, 
Prior— CAES.  B.  G.  5,  34,  2 ;  SEN.  Suas.  3,  6 ;  Controv.  1  praef. 
15 ;  2  praef.  2  ;  2  praef.  5  (bis)  ;  OVID,  Met.  3,  495 ;  VAMSR.  MAX. 
2, 1,  6  (PAR.  also,  and  at  3,  6,  4) ;  CURT.  10, 1,  29  ;  Luc.  3,  700 ; 
SEN.    Epp.    6,    3,    3    (bis);    Dial.    4,    10,    5 ;    9,    15,    2 ;    Nat. 
Quaes.  2,  26,  4;  SIL.  ITAI»  17,  339;  MART.  11,  104,  14;  TAC. 
Hist.  1,  10,  8;  Ann.  1,  25,  4;  15,  30,  2;  Juv.  10,  29;  FIX>R.  2 
28,  18;  GELT..  9,  5,  8;  PRUD.  Perist.  10,  703;  SutP.  SEVER,  p. 
204,  4 ;  MART.  CAPELL.  3,  227.— Future  Perfect,  Prior— PUBMI,. 
SYR.  M.  11;   HOR.  Carm.  4,  10,  6;  (PORPH.  Epp.  1,  18,  45); 
SEN.  Controv.  1  praef.  20;  OVID,  Fast.  4,  861  ;  Cot.  2,  17,  6; 
de  Arb.  15 ;  CURT.  10,  6,  15 ;  CELS.  1,  8  fin. ;  3,  18  fin. ;  21  med.  ; 
5,  19,  12;  7,  3  med.;  8,  10,  1  fin.;  SC.RIB.  LARG.  200;  SEN. 
Epp.  2,  1,  6;  5,  6,  11;  7,  7,  2;    9,  1,  1 ;  18,  1,  9;    Dial.  4, 

7,  2 ;  6,  8,  2 ;  9,  3  ;  12,  18,  9 ;  Nat.  Quaest.  2,  1,  4 ;  3  praef.  11 ; 
4  praef.  21  ;  6,  23,  3  (ter);  PMN.  Epp.  2,  6,  6 ;  QUINTII,.  4,  1, 
70;  76;  8,3,55;  11,1,  78;  HYGIN.  GROM.  4 ;  32 ;  MART.  5,4, 
5;  11,   95,   1;  Juv.   5,   145;  TERENT.  SCAUR,  vn  (K.)  24,  2; 
CYPR.  p.  430,  19;  TERENT.  MAUR.  VI  (K.)  Lit,   199;  PAIXAD. 
3,  18,  2  ;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  13,  24  ;  23,  2 ;  33,  27;  I>IOM. 
I  (K.)  473,  11   (cf.   502,   26);    MACROB.   Som.   Scip.    1,   6,   33; 
MARCEIX.  p.  55,  6  (Helmr.);  Ill,  28;   149,  26;  210,  22;  237, 
32;    270,   22;    272,   5;    281,   14;  18;   292,  21;   311,   22;  327, 


32  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

29;  342,  24;  345,  10;  376,  17  ;  SYM.  Epp.  3,  8 ;  7,  3 ;  MART. 
CAPEIX.  4,  346;  CASS.  FEL.  19;  33;  42;  51;  53;  59;  66; 
FAUST,  p.  112, 4  ;  266,  23  ;  LUCIF.  p.  254,  24  ;  SID.  APOIX.  Epp.  8, 
14,  5  ;  BOETH.  Arith.  1,  29  (p.  61,  26  Fried.)  ;  Geom.  p.  393,  17 ; 
ENNOD.  p.  142,  18;  161,17;  164,  5;  503,  19;  DIGEST.  Paul, 
xxxvir,  1,6;  Ulp.  vii,  4,  3  praef. ;  Marcian.  xxxix,  4,  16,  3 ; 
CAssioi>.vii(K.)172,  3. 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Present — SEN.  Controv.  2,  5,  11  (ter) ;  CURT. 
4,  10,  6;  SEN.  Epp.  6,  3,  9 ;  Nat.  Quaest.  1,  13,  1 ;  PJLIN. 
Nat.  Hist.  17, 129;  18.350;  24,158*;  27,7;  32,15;  133;  34, 
122;  QUINTIL.  1,  7,  10;  PSEUD. -QUINTII,.  p.  377,  21  (Ritter) ; 
PJLIN.  Epp.  8,  20,  1;  TAC.  Ann.  1,  26,  13;  3,  69,  16;  12, 
19,  8;  47,  6;  TERENT.  SCAUR.  VII  (K.)  11,  9;  12,  17;  21,  17; 
AMM.  MARC.  17,  10,  4 ;  SID.  APOIX.  Epp.  1,  7,  7  ;  PRISC.  n  (K.) 
37,  21 ;  DIGEST.  Scaevol.  XLVI,  3,  93,  2;  Ulp.  L,  17,  161.— Im- 
perfect— LIVY  27,  6,  7;  39,  33,  8;  Perioch.  59,  20;  PROPERT. 
2,  1,  27;  SEN.  Controv.  7,  4,  4;  7,  19;  CURT.  10,  4,  3;  PmN. 
Nat.  Hist.  7,  141  ;  8,  14;  27,  69;  QUINTIL.  1,  7,  20;  2,  4,  13; 
27;  9,  4,  38;  STAT.  Silv.  5,  3,  215;  FRONTIN.  Strat.  3,  3,  4; 
Aq.  12;  125;  MART.  7,  37.  3;  PUN.  Epp.  3,  16,  4;  Pan.  13; 
TAC.  Hist.  1,  24,  5;  66,  19;  Ann.  2,  2,  12;  34,  22;  3,  33,14; 
65,  10;  4,  31,9;  6,10,13;  15,13;  21,1;  29,  8;  13,3,16;  18, 
16;  27,  14;  14,  20,  9;  52,  11;  15,  13,  10;  TERENT.  SCAUR. 
Vii  (K.)  25,  3;  4;  18,  18;  SUETON.  Jul.  26;  28;  Aug.  21; 
37;  38;  41;  44;  45;  56;  57;  77;  82;  Tib.  19;  Calig.  4 ;  33; 
35;  Claud.  8;  Nero  15;  27;  28;  Galba  10;  Otho  4;  Dorait. 
2;  21;  de  Vir.  111.  p.  24,  3  (R.);  61,  4;  138,  17;  CYPR. 
Carm.  2,  5 ;  Jui»  CAPITOL.  M.  Anton.  10,  6  ;  AEL.  LAM- 
PRID.  Commod.  11,  11 ;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  12,  16 ;  20,  7 ; 
OBSEQ.  21;  DIOM.  I  (K.)  476,  2;  AMM.  MARC.  16,  12;  67; 
CLAUDIAN.  Carm.  Min.  30,  97  ;  DIGEST.  Javol.  vni,  1,  20 ;  Papin. 
xix,  5,  8. — Perfect,  Prior — OVID,  Trist  5,  10,  42 ;  SEN.  Epp.  2, 
1,  6;  19,  1,  17;  Dial.  7,  24,  3;  PMN.  Nat.  Hist.  18,  259;  23, 
103;  28,  11  (bis);  36,  134;  QUINTII,.  12,  10,  33;  PSEUD.- 
QUINTII,.  p.  3,  1  (Ritter) ;  210,  2 ;  VEL.  L.ONG.  VII  (K.)  63,  9 ; 
11  ;  TERENT.  SCAUR.  VII  (K.)  25,  19  ;  AMFEL.  8,  17  ;  CYPR.  App. 
p.  33,  7 ;  DIOM.  I  (K.)  427,  28 ;  AMM.  MARC.  14,  3,  1 ;  SYM. 
Epp.  3,  65;  4,  61,  3;  SERV.  ^En.  12,  151 ;  CASS.  FEL.  38;  60; 


UNIVERSITY   )/  v 

^^~-:..u.J=L^ay 

On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  33 

61  ;  72  ;  FAUST,  p.  330, 24  ;  SID.  APOLI,.  Epp.  9, 1 1,  8  ;  Carm.  22, 
§5;  ENNOD.  p.  69,  4 ;  171,8;  437,  23;  471,16;  Carm.  1,  8 
praef.  1  ;  9,  62 ;  DIGEST.  Terent.  Clemens  xxxv,  2,  67 ;  Ulp.  vn, 
1,  25,  7;  BOJETH.  Consol.  1,  6  (p.  22,  54  Peip.) ;  CYPR.  GAIX. 
Exod.  980.— Pluperfect,  Prior— LIVY  23,  32,  3  ;  SEN.  Controv. 
10  praef.  13  ;  CURT.  6,  11,  2;  9,  6,  4;  *EN.  de  Ben.  3,  32,  5; 
PLIN.  Nat.  Hist.  23,  56;  QCINTII,,  6,  1,  40;  FRONTIN.  Strat.  4, 
7,  7;  Aq.  87;  TAC.  Hist.  3,  83,  3 ;  Ann.  3,  71,  11  ;  4,  16,  19; 
6,2,10;  13,49,  8;  SUETON.  Aug.  99 ;  Calig.  36;  Claud.  42 ; 
MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  24,  4 ;  PRUDENT.  Perist.  10,  758  ;  SERV. 
^En.  11,  517  ;  CLAUDIAN.  in  Eufin.  2,  75  ;  de  in  Consul.  Honor. 
25  ;  de  vi  Consul.  Honor.  82 ;  EUGIPP.  p.  33,  1. 

D.  CORRELATIVE  :  INDICATIVE,  Present— CATUIX.  71,5; 
Cic.  Vatin.  12,  29  ;  de  Orat.  1,  125 ;  251 ;  2,  130  (bis);  PUBLIL. 
SYR.  H.  13 ;  SEN.  Controv.  1,1,6;  OVID,  Her.  19, 113 ;  Met.  10, 
164 ;  ex  Pont.  4,  9,  112;  Coi,.  11,  3,  32  ;  CAUP.  Sic.  2,  88  ;  SEN. 
Epp.  19,  4,  7;  Dial.  9,  17,  1;  11,  12,  3;  Here.  O.  426*;  614; 
VEL.  LONG.  VII  (K.)  58,  10;  66,  7;  SUETON.  Prat.  p.  275,  9 
(Reiff.);  CYPR.  p.  576,  23;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  72,  15; 
SERV.  Aen.  1,407;  MART.  CAPEIX.  7,  791;  792*;  SAI.VIAN. 
p.  302,  10;  FAUST,  p.  39,  1;  199,  23;  DIGEST.  Scaevol.  XLV,  3, 
19  ;  Javol.  vm,  6,  15  ;  xvin,  1,  65  ;  CASSIOD.  vm  (K.)  161, 11 ; 
BOETH.  Trin.  p.  151,  17  (Peip.). — Imperfect — OVID,  Her.  10, 
23;  SEN.  Dial.  5,  18,  1;  APUI.  Met.  10,  22.— Future— CATO, 
Agr.  Cult.  1,1;  Cic.  Marc.  6,  19;  Rab.  Post.  9,  25;  SEN. 
Dial.  4,  7,  2;  PHAED.  177;  Here.  O.  426;  PUN.  Pan.  88; 
MART.  CAPEILL.  7,  792. — Perfect,  (a)  Contemporary — VERG.  Aen. 
12,  483;  PORPH.  ad  HOR.  Carm.  4,  9,  40;  SEN.  Controv.  7, 
1,27;  TAC.  Ann1.  14,64,14;  MIN.  FEL.  p.  36,  8  (Halm);  CYPR.  p. 
580,  7  ;  Jui,.  VALER.  Ort.  Alex.  3,  60 ;  CI.AUDIAN.  de  IV  Consul. 
Honor.  621 ;  FAUST,  p.  68,  24 ;  L.UCIF.  p.  286,  4 ;  ENNOD.  p.  348, 
9.— (b)  Prior.— Cic.  Sull.  30,  83  ;  SEN.  Suas.  6,  21  ;  OVID,  Met.  3, 
451  ;  VAUER.  MAX.  4,  1,  7 ;  CEI,S.  4,  18  med. ;  VAI/ER.  FI.ACC. 
6,  683;  GEIX.  14,  2,  19;  SERV.  Aen.  9,  138;  DIGEST.  Ulp. 
Ill,  2,  2,  2  ;  vii,  2,  3  praef. — Future  Perfect,  Prior — SCRIB.  LARG. 
232;  MAR.  VICTORIN.  VI  (K.)  Met.  211,  16;1  MACROS.  7,  8,  12; 

1  Cf.  Teuff.  Hist.  Rom.  Lit.  $  408,  4 ;  no  especial  fondness  seems  to  be  shown. 


34  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

MARCELL.  p.  385,  10  (Helmr.);  SALVIAN.  p.  302,  14;  CLAUD* 
MAMERT.  p.  93,  6  (Engelbr.) ;  DIGEST.  Callist.  L,  16,  220  praef. ; 
BOETH.  Mus.  1,  3  (p.  190,  10  Fried.). 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Present — Cic.  ad  Fam.  7,  7,  1 ;  LIVY  6, 
15,  7;  SEN.  Epp.  14,  2,  15;  de  Ben.  1,  11,  6;  GAI.  1, 
162. — Imperfect — Cic.  ad  Att.  1,  14,  3  (ter);  SEN.  Controv.  4r 
praef.  7;  PEIN.  Pan.  42;  58;  FRONTIN.  Strat.  2,  13,  7;  AEL. 
SPART.  Anton.  Geta  7,  5  (bis). — Perfect,  Prior — PSEUD.-QUINTIL* 
p.  16,  18  (Hitter);  24;  TERTUM,.  p.  360,  13  (R.-W.  1);  LACT. 
p.  576, 17  (L.-B.  1);  MACROB.  7, 14,  9  ;  SERV.  Eel.  1,  8  ;  AUGUST, 
Civ.  Dei  2, 1  fin. ;  LUCIF.  p.  190,  9;  SID.  AFOLI,.  Epp.  7,  14, 11. 

QUOTIENSCUNQUE. 

A.  RELATIVE  :  INDICATIVE,  Present— PLAUT.  Capt.  97  ; 
True.  282;  Cic.  ad  Fam.  6,  5,  1 ;  13,  41,  1  ;  PORPH.  ad  HOR. 
Epod.  17,  52;  HYGIN.  Astron.  2,  14  raed. ;  VALER.  MAX* 
8,  15,  1;  CELS.  6,  6,  16;  7,  1  fin.;  8,  10,  1  med. ;  PETRON. 
36;  PSEUD.-SEN.  Epp.  ad  Paul.  4;  10;  CYPR.  p.  331,  24; 
706,  3;  714,  24;  App.  30,  20;  CHARTS.  I  (K.)  217,  11 ;  229,  3 ; 
OROS,  p.  638, 1 7  (Zang.) ;  MART.  CAPEIX.  7, 794 ;  SERV.  Eel.  1, 37 ; 
Ge.  1,397;  Mu.l,  9;  17;  73;  77;  3,  16;  241;  384;  4,  179; 
FAUST,  p.  110,  19  ;  226,  3 ;  PRISC.  n  (K.)  25,  16  ;  33,  19 ;  FUL- 
GENT. Myth.  2,  16  med.;  BOETH.  Arith.  2,  4  (p.  87,  6  Fried.) ;  46 
(p.  150, 19);  GREG.  TUR.  Vit.  Patr.  20  praef. — Imperfect — VALER. 
MAX.  8, 12, 1  (PAR.  also)  ;  CHARIS.  I  (K.)  195,  9.— Future— CATO, 
Agr.  Cult.  151,  4 ;  AUCT.  AD  HER.  3,  20,  34 ;  Cic.  Tusc.  3,  84 ; 
Fin.  5,  29 ;  ad  Fam.  16,  11,  3 ;  de  Orat.  3,  123 ;  LIVY  43,  14,  6 ; 
VITRUV.  10,  14,  7;  DIGEST.  Alf.  Var.  xxxm,  1,  22;  Ulp.  xxv, 
4,  1,  10;  GREG.  TUR.  Hist.  Franc.  4, 16  med. — Perfect,  (a)  Contem- 
porary— NEPOS  17,  3,  6  ;  18,  5, 7 ;  23, 1,  2  ;  Cic.  Prov.  Cons.  1,2; 
Verr.  4,  26,  57 ;  Cat.  1,  5,  11  ;  ad  Fam.  5,  2,  9 ;  6,  1 ;  13,  69,  1  ; 
CURT.  5,  2,  22;  PETRON.  85;  FRONTO,  ad  Am.  1,  3  (p.  175  N.); 
TERTUIX.  p.  152,  11  (R.-W.  1);  ST.  SILVIA,  Peregrin.  50; 
OROS.  p.  189,  19;  SERV.  JEn.  4,  627;  SALVIAN.  p.  20,  10; 
GREG.  TUR.  de  Virt.  S.  Jul.  43.— (b)  Prior— VARRO,  R.  R.  3, 10, 
7;  LIVY  7,  26,  5;  SEN.  Controv.  1,  8,  6;  CELS.  7,  12,  1  fin.; 
DIGEST.  Ulp.  IV,  6,  26,  9. — Pluperfect,  (a)  Contemporary — AUCT* 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  35 

BELL.  AFR.  72, 1 . — (b)  Prior — VALER.  MAX.  3, 6, 4 ;  PETRON.  111. 
—Future  Perfect,  Prior—  Cic.  de  Orat.  2,  244 ;  Sest.  69,  146 ; 
VITRUV.  5,  12,4;  CYPR.  p.  430,  18;  708,  23;  24;  709,  3; 
AUGUST.  Civ.  Dei  11,  31  med.;  FAUST,  p.  38,  24;  BURIC.  p.  425, 
23 ;  DIGEST.  Ulp.  L,  5, 1,  1 ;  BOETH.  Mus.  2,  8  (p.  236,  7  Fried.). 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Present — Cic.  Brut.  4. — Imperfect — Cic.  Phil.  5, 
8,  21  ;  Dom.  29,  78  ;  de  Orat.  1,  123 ;  LIVY  5,  54,  3.— Perfect,  (a) 
Contemporary — CAES.  B.  C.  1,7, 5. — (b)- Prior — FRONTO,  ad  Anton. 
3  (p.  1 52  N.).— Pluperfect,  (a)  Contemporary— LIVY  39,  39, 1 1 .— (b) 
Prior — NEPOS  7,  3,  5 ;  LIVY  8,  35,  10;  AMM.  MARC.  16,  10,  18. 

B.  CORRELATIVE  :  INDICATIVE,  Present— VARRO,  R.  R.  2, 

4,  15  ;  Cic.  Cluent.  18,  51.— Future—  Cic.  de  Orat,  2,  249;  Plane. 
6,  14.— Perfect— Cic.  Rose.  Com.  6,  18  ;  Dom.  26,  69  ;  27,  71.— 
Future  Perfect,  Prior— Cic.  de  Orat.  2,  137. 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Imperfect — I/IVY  31,  44,  6. — Perfect — Cic.  Yerr. 

5,  8,  21. 

QTJOTIENSQUE. 

RELATIVE:  INDICATIVE,  Preset— COL.  6,  17,  9;  12,  52, 
16;  DIGEST.  Ulp.  XLin,  8,  2,  10;  RURIC.  p.  382,  13.— Imper- 
fect—ST.  SILVIA,  Peregrin.  50.— Future—  COL.  2,  4,  10;  12,  51, 
2. — Future  Perfect,  Prior — DIGEST.  Ulp.  vii,  4,  3  praef. 

SUBJUNCTIVE,  Imperfect — SUETON.  Aug.  37 ;   Calig.  7. 


36  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 


PART   III. 


SUMMARY. 

Many  authors  show  a  distinct  fondness  for  quotiens  as  suited  to 
a  given  sphere,  or  appropriate  for  some  particular  feature  of  style, 
while  others  evidently  avoid  its  use.  In  Orosius  and  Augustine, 
for  example,  but  few  occurrences  were  found  in  works  of  consider- 
able extent.  Of  the  authors  in  whom  no  examples  were  noted,  the 
works  are  in  most  cases  brief.  Lucretius,  Pomponius  Mela  and 
Probus  are  the  most  notable  exceptions,  the  last  especially,  in  con- 
trast with  the  striking  usage  of  other  grammarians.  No  examples 
were  noted  in  the  following  list : 

Lucretius,  Hirtius,  Mela,  Nemesianus,  Persius,  Probus,  Caper, 
Granius  Licinianus,  Censorinus,  Commodianus,  Plotius,  Publilius 
Optatianus,  Atilius  Fortunatianus,  Jul.  Firm.  Maternus,  Aurel. 
Victor  (de  Caess.),  Eutropius,  Dictys  Cretensis,  Rufinus  (de 
Comp.),  Hieronymus  (deVir.  111.),  Mall.  Theodorus,  Pelagonius, 
Agroecius,  Dares  Phrygius,  Jordanis. 

On  the  other  hand,  but  two  authors,  Cicero  and  Livy,  show 
examples  in  all  the  main  divisions  given,  followed  next  in  range 
by  Cato  and  the  Senecas,  though  the  latter  do  not  use  the  com- 
pound correlative;  while  Vergil,  Ovid,  Pseudo-Quiutilian,  Taci- 
tus, Claudius  Claudianus  and  Ennodius  have  quotiens  in  all  its 
divisions,  with  intentional  omission  of  the  compound. 

Quotiens  interrogative  (119  examples)  is  less  frequent  than  quo- 
tiens in  exclamation  (148  examples),  and  these  two  classes  combined 
are  but  little  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  simple  relatives  (1053 
examples).  The  proportion  given  between  interrogatives  and 
exclamations  is  in  reality  less  exact  because  the  rhetorical  question 
and  the  exclamation  are  so  readily  interchanged ;  cf.  for  example 
Serv.  Sulpic.  apud  Cic.  ad  Fam.  4,  5,  3  quotiens  in  earn  cogita- 
tionem  necesse  est  et  tu  veneris  et  nos  saepe  incidimus  .  .  .? 
Ovid,  Her.  16,  217  ipse  mihi  quotiens  irattis  "  ad ultera"  dices  ? 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  37 

Lucan  8,  408  Parthorum  dominus  quotiens  sic  sanguine  mixto 
Nascitur  Arsacides  ?  and  further,  Sen.  Epp.  14,  3,  9  ;  Stat.  Theb. 
5,  615;  Fronto,  ad  Ver.  Imp.  2,  8;  Cypr.  p.  44,  15;  Carm.  6, 
278;  279 ;  Arnob.  p.  271,  16 ;  Ennod.  p.  9,  22 ;  310,  8 ;  9  ;  372, 
2 ;  3  ;  426,  26  ;  27  ;  479,  27,  etc. 

In  the  exclamatory  usage  most  of  the  examples,  as  was  to  be 
expected,  refer  to  the  past.  The  perfect  indicative  is  so  used  in 
more  than  three-fourths  of  the  total  number  of  examples.  Here, 
too,  the  emotional  character  of  the  elegiac  in  Tibullus,  Proper- 
tins  and  Ovid  adds  largely  to  the  total,  though  the  strongly- 
marked  rhetorical  tendency1  in  Ovid  must  also  be  taken  into 
account. 

The  most  noteworthy  features  in  connection  with  the  simple 
relative  usage  are  the  departmental  characteristics  and  the  marked 
tendency  toward  the  present  indicative,  contemporary,  type.  Epic 
poets,  on  the  whole,  do  not  use  quotiens  so  freely  as  do  the  Elegiac 
and  the  Lyric  poets.  In  prose,  wherever  the  oratorical  or  rhetor- 
ical element  is  strong,  quotiens  is  naturally  in  frequent  use ;  com- 
pare the  numerous  examples  in  Cicero,  the  speeches  in  Livy,2  the 
Senecas,  Pliny  the  Elder,  etc.  No  examples  are  found  in  Sallust 
except  in  fragments  of  speeches.  Again,  among  medical  writers 
where  definite  direction  is  given  :  As  often  as  the  fever  comes  on, 
whenever  certain  symptoms  appear,  etc.,  the  very  large  percentage 
of  future  and  future  perfect  examples  is  to  be  noted,  inasmuch  as 
quotiens  in  these  authors  is  largely  confined  to  the  one  class  of 
examples.  Compare  especially  Marcellus  and  Cassius  Felix,  the 
latter  having,  in  indicative  examples,  only  the  future  perfect  with 
quotiens. 

The  grammarians  show  a  characteristic  no  less  marked  in  the 
frequency  of  quotiens  in  definitions  and  rules.  Here  the  terms 
are  general  and  the  present  indicative  prevails.  Yet  this  type  is 
in  the  line  of  a  general  development.  Observe  its  growth :  Cicero, 
out  of  six  examples  of  the  relative,  uses  the  present  indicative  but 
twice  (not  at  all  in  the  orations),  Vergil  out  of  three  examples  has 

1  Cf.  Schanz,  Gesch.  d.  rom.  Lit.  Miinch.  1899,  u,  p.  190. 

2  More  frequently  as  interrogative,  however,  than  as  relative. 


38  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienseunque. 

it  twice,  but  Propertius  has  no  occurrence  in  seven  examples,  nor 
Livy  in  four.  Seneca  Rhetor  in  24  examples  has  three  cases, 
while  Seneca  the  Younger  has  only  24  instances  out  of  71  ex- 
amples. But  Ovid  has  15  out  of  23,  and  Lucan  five  out  of  six. 
Curtius  again  has  no  occurrence  in  nine  examples,  Pliny  the 
Elder  but  three  out  of  30,  Quintilian,  forerunner  of  the  gram- 
marians, 25  out  of  55,  Tacitus  eight  out  of  40.  Then  the  pro- 
portion becomes  larger :  Tertullian  has  four  out  of  five,  Maurus 
13  out  of  17,  Lactantius  has  only  the  single  usage  in  six  examples, 
as  has  also  Charisius  in  19,  Diomedes  has  41  oat  of  45,  Flavius 
Vegetius  six  of  the  one  class,  Ausonius  nine  out  of  ten,  Macrobius 
five  out  of  six,  Servius  55  out  of  63,  Claudius  Claudianus  11  out 
of  20,  Martianus  Capella  13  out  of  17,  Sid.  Apoll.  18  out  of  26, 
Priscian  seven  out  of  eight,  Ennodius  37  out  of  49  and  Oyprianus 
Gall  us  10  out  of  12.  Or  by  periods,  until  the  time  of  Tertullian 
out  of  414  indicative  examples  only  196  were  of  the  present  tense; 
but  from  Tertullian  to  the  end  of  the  period  examined  out  of 
471  examples,  370  are  of  this  classification.  This  shows  a  decided 
falling  off  in  the  exactness  obtained  at  an  earlier  period  by  the  use 
of  tenses  of  priority.  Our  list  would  appear  still  larger  if  we 
counted  here  the  39  examples  out  of  91  indicatives  with  the  full 
compound,  and  four  out  of  eight  with  quot\ensque.  In  fact  this 
usage  became  so  identified  with  the  simple  form  that  we  may  find 
here  an  explanation  of  the  comparative  infrequency  of  the  com- 
pound except  in  the  sphere  of  vulgar  Latin,  where  fullness  of 
expression  is  a  characteristic. 

The  list  of  examples  has  been  carefully  examined  to  see  whether 
any  possible  conditional  force  in  quotiens1  has  affected  the  choice 
of  quis  and  aliquis  in  collocation,  as  in  the  ordinary  use  after  si. 
But  in  both  the  earlier  authors  and  the  better  late  ones  aliquis  is 
the  favorite,  whether  as  nominative,  or  accusative  or  other  oblique 
cases,  in  both  pronominal  and  adjectival  use. 

The  greater  exactness  of  the  Latin  in  expressing  priority  is 
shown  in  the  88  examples  of  future  perfect  against  66  examples 

1  Cf.  the  combination  si  quotiens,  Ovid,  Trist.  5,  10,  42 ;  Sulp.  Sever,  p.  131,  5 ; 
p.  204,  4. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  39 

of  the  future.     Note  also  70  examples  of  the  perfect  prior  against 
43  of  the  perfect  contemporary.1 

The  total  number  (97)  of  correlatives  is  strikingly  small  in  com- 
parison with  the  number  of  times  quotiens  is  used  without  deter- 
mination. Similarly,  quotienscunque  (quotiensque)  is  used  112  times 
without  determination,  and  but  ten  times  with  totiens.  The  expla- 
nation for  this  lies  apparently  in  the  formality  or  stiffness  of  this 
particular  correlative.  Cicero,  the  Senecas  and  Ovid  are  about  the 
only  classical  authors  with  more  than  a  few  sporadic  examples. 
Only  something  like  the  stiffness  of  the  expression  must  have  kept 
the  Roman,  fond  as  he  was  of  antitheses  and  parallelisms  in  both 
prose  and  poetry,  from  making  more  extensive  use  of  it  here. 
Other  correlatives,  especially  quantus  .  .  tantus,  quails  .  .  tails,  con- 
stantly recur.2 

One  instance  of  quotiens  .  .  totiens  was  found  in  an  inscription, 
CIL.  II,  3367  quotiens  poto  totiens  propino. 

Interesting  .variations  in  the  order  of  correlatives  occur.  So  for 
example  Ovid  uses  tot .  .  quot  14  times,  quot . .  tot  six,  totidem  . .  quot 
six;  quot  .  .  totidem  once.  In  the  poets  metrical  considerations  nat- 
urally affect  the  order.  In  general,  however,  the  relative  might  be 
expected  to  precede.  The  examples  show  the  order  quotiens  . .  totiens 
53  times,  totiens  .  .  quotiens  44  times.  With  quotienscunque ,  totiens 
invariably  follows. 

An  emphatic  tune  is  sometimes  substituted  for  totiens,  especially 
where  quotiens  has  rather  the  force  of  cum.  Cf.  for  quotiens  .  .  tune, 
Yaler.  Flacc.  8,  364;  Gell.  14,  7,  4;  Mar.  Victorin.  vi  (K.)  217, 
17 ;  Charis.  n  (K.)  85, 13  ;  Diom.  I  (K.)  322, 11 ;  Claud.  Claudian. 
de  Rapt.  Proserp.  1,  157;  Sid.  Apoll.  Epp.  8, 14,  4;  Boeth.  Mus. 
1,  28  (p.  220,  3  Fried.) ;  2, 13  (243,  5)— nine  examples.  For  tune  .  . 
quotiens,  Vel.  Long.  VII  (K.)  63,  6  ;  Sil.  Ital.  15, 113  ;  Juv.  14,  21  • 

1  The  aoristic  perfect  has  not  been  treated  separately ;  but  few  examples  occur, 
cf.  Juv.  3,  40;  Mart.  5,  72;  and  associated  in  Claudian.  in  Eutrop.  1,  239. 

In  another  class,  the  present  (=  fut.)  associated  with  a  future  has  been  treated 
as  contemporary ;  cf.  Col.  6,  17,  9 ;  Sen.  de  Ben.  4,  7,  1 ;  Stat.  Achill.  1,  909 ; 
Hygin.  Grom.  43;  Mar.  Victorin.  vi(K.)  10,  10;  199,  14;  Mart.  Capell.  7,  792; 
Prise,  ii  (K.)  303,  6.  See  also,  Werth,  de  Terentiani  Sermone,  Jahrb.  Spbd. 
xxn,  pp.  345,  369. 

8Cf.  Draeger,  n,  520  ff.;  and  Weise,  Char.  d.  lat.  Sprache,  Leipz.  1891,  p.  19. 


40  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

Terent.  Maur.  vi  (K.)  Lit.  199;  Mar.  Victoria,  vi  (K.)  83,  12; 
Charis.  I  (K.)  173,  9 ;  Ennod.  p.  454,  18 ;  Carm.  1,  9,  62 ;  72  ; 
Digest.  Callist.  IV,  2,  13;  Ulp.  VII,  1,  25,  7;  Cassiod.  p.  161, 
24 — 12  examples.  The  balance  in  favor  of  the  latter  class, 
though  not  large,  would  seem  to  indicate  that  when  quotiens  pre- 
cedes, tune  is  less  likely  to  be  substituted  for  totiens. 

Sometimes,  as  in  the  case  of  other  correlatives,  the  forms  do  not 
correspond ;  compare  for  illustration  tanta  .  .  quam,  Ter.  Hec. 
416;  Verg.  Aen.  6,  352;  frequent  in  Livy,  26,  1,  3;  37,  51,  9, 
etc.,  Tac.  Dial  6  (see  Gudeman's  note) ;  quanta  .  .  tarn,  Lucret.  5, 
463.  Such  examples,  however,  are  not  frequent.1  The  following 
instances  for  quotiens  have  been  noted  :  tot  .  .  quotiens,  Sail.  Hist. 
2,  98,  1  (Maur.) ;  totiens  .  .  quot,  Livy  2,  13,  2 ;  Plin.  Nat.  Hist. 
26,  64;  36,  101;  Apul.  p.  324  ad  fin.  (Hild.);  quot  .  .  totiens, 
Yaler.  Flacc.  1,  580;  Boeth.  Arith.  2,  4  (p.  87,  4  Fried.). 

While  quotienscunque  belongs  to  prose,  with  the  unimportant 
exception  of  two  examples  in  Plautus,  it  cannot  be  limited  to  any 
one  sphere.  The  122  examples  found  (counting  here  the  ten  ex- 
amples of  quotiensque)  are  scattered  through  a  wide  range  of 
authors.  "With  Plautus,  Cato,  Nepos,  Vitruv.,  Auct.  Bell.  Afric., 
Col.,  CeJs.,  Petron.,  Fronto,  Tertull.,  Silvia,  Ammianus,  Gre- 
gory, and  other  similar  names  in  the  list,  there  would  seem  at  first 
glance  to  be  a  distinct  tendency  toward  vulgar  usage.  Nepos2  has 
only  the  compound,  four  examples,  while  Petronius3  has  five  ex- 
amples against  a  single  quotiens;  Vitruvius4  and  Fronto  have  each 
a  proportion  of  two  to  one,  but  the  number  of  examples  is  small. 
In  many  of  the  other  authors  quotiens  outnumbers  the  compound, 
while  in  such  an  author  as  Apuleius  only  quotiens  is  found.  Cicero 
even  seems  to  prefer  quotienscunque  in  the  orations  and  rhetorical 
works,  though  in  a  large  number  of  these  examples  it  is  evident 
that  he  aimed  purposely  at  the  additional  emphasis  of  the  compound ; 
cf.  Verr.  4,  26,  57;  Cat.  1,  5,  4;  Phil.  5,  8,  21 ;  Dom.  78,  etc. 
On  the  other  hand,  in  the  letters  quotiens  is  used  nine  times  (three 
times,  however,  in  anaphora,  ad  Att.  1,  14,  13),  quotienscunque  six 
times ;  cf.  again  the  special  emphasis  in  such  an  example  as  ad  Fam. 

1  Cf.  Draeger,  n,  §  521.  2  Teuff.  g  198. 

3Durch  und  durch  vulgar,  Wolff,  Philol.  xxxiv,  145. 
4  Miodonski,  ALL.  vm,  146. 


On  the  Usage  oj  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  41 

16,  11,  3  tu  etiam  atque  etiam  cura,  ut  valeas  litterasque  ad  me 
mittas,  quotienscunque  habebis,  cui  des.  It  is  safe  to  conclude  that 
Cicero  merely  used  the  compound  with  greater  exactness  than  is 
found  in  most  of  his  successors.  That  the  simple  and  the  com- 
pound relative  were  not  always  carefully  distinguished  has  been 
shown  in  Part  I,  but  the  comparatively  small  number  of  com- 
pounds in  the  language  is  due  not  so  much  to  this  inaccuracy  as  to 
the  increasing  number  of  present  indicative  examples  with  the 
simple  relative  having  a  general  force. 

The  summary  thus  far  has  dealt  chiefly  with  indicative  examples, 
and  their  classification  has  been  relatively  simple.  But  in  turning 
to  the  subjunctive  usage  much  greater  difficulty  is  encountered. 
Omitting  the  interrogative  subjunctives,  as  indirect  and  therefore 
outside  of  the  present  discussion,  we  find  in  the  various  relative 
classes  approximately  200  subjunctive  examples  against  five  times 
as  many  of  the  indicative.  Of  these  approximately  200  examples, 
considerably  over  50  per  cent,  represent  uses  of  the  mode  common 
in  all  periods,  such  as  by  attraction,  or  in  the  subordinate  clause 
of  indirect  discourse,  while  about  86  examples  are  of  the  so-called 
iterative  usage.  Yet  with  the  exception  of  fewer  than  a  half  dozen 
examples,  as  listed  below,  these  86  examples  are  found  only  with 
the  simple  relative  and  the  proportion  then  becomes  practically 
one-half  of  all  the  subjunctives  in  this  class.  In  thus  narrowing 
the  count,  however,  to  a  single  category  it  will  be  observed  that 
the  proportion  given  is  deceptive ;  and  after  all,  the  vital  question 
is  why  other  possible  classes  do  not  show  numerous  examples  of 
the  iterative,  and  why  with  the  simple  relative  the  proportion  of 
indicative  examples  is  so  overwhelmingly  large  that  reasonable 
expectations,  aroused  by  the  natural  force  of  quotiens  and  encour- 
aged by  Draeger  and  other  grammarians,  have  been  disappointed. 
Does  the  meaning  of  quotiens  naturally  invite  the  iterative  subjunc- 
tive, or  is  the  point  of  view  merely  a  summing  up  in  retrospect l 
with  the  indicative  ? 

An  unqualified  assent  cannot  be  given  to  either  alternative.  The 
usage  of  the  language  in  a  large  measure  apparently  contradicts  the 

xFor  the  phraseology,  cf.  Gildersleeve-Lodge.  Lat.  Gram.  §  567,  note,  in 
remarks  on  the  indicative  vs.  the  subjunctive  in  general  for  iterative  sentences. 


42  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

first,  while  on  the  other  hand  the  retention  of  the  indicative  so 
generally  in  iterative  tenses  after  the  iterative  subjunctive  had 
become  well  established  may  be  due  in  part  to  the  conservative 
influence  of  an  overwhelming  growth  in  the  use  of  the  present 
indicative  with  general  conditional  force.  This  growth,  as  already 
shown  above,  served  materially  to  restrict  the  use  of  quotienscum- 
que  in  later  Latin,  and  in  the  present  connection  it  is  perfectly  con- 
ceivable that  it  helped  even  in  other  tenses  to  hold  the  indicative 
in  line.  Especially  is  this  true  where  there  could  be  little  or  no 
idea  of  description,  characterization  or  other  such  connotation  to 
facilitate  the  extension  of  the  subjunctive.1 

1  Prof.  Hale  has  even  maintained,  in  connection  with  cum,  that  the  subjunctive 
for  repeated  action  in  Latin  is  simply  an  extension  of  the  ordinary  use  of  the 
cum-clause  of  situation.  "  The  subjunctive  of  repeated  action  is  generally  believed 
to  appear  first  in  the  imperfect  and  pluperfect  tenses,  and  for  a  considerable  time 
to  be  confined  to  these  tenses.  This  is  precisely  what  would  be  expected  if  the 
change  is  due  to  the  influence  of  the  narrative  guom-clause, — itself  always  in  the 
pluperfect  or  imperfect.  But  if  the  change  were  due  to  the  idea  of  potentiality, 
there  would  be  no  reason  why  that  idea  should  not  take  effect  in  the  present  or 
perfect  as  well ;  and,  similarly,  if  the  change  were  due  to  Greek  influence,  the 
use  of  the  subjunctive  in  secondary  tenses  under  the  model  of  the  Greek  general- 
izing optative  would  be  inseparable  from  the  use  of  the  subjunctive  in  primary 
tenses  under  the  model  of  the  Greek  generalizing  subjunctive."  The  Cum 
Constructions,  n  (1889),  p.  237.  Cf.  also  Brenous,  Etude  sur  les  Hellenismes  dans 
la  Syntaxe  latine,  Paris,  1895,  p.  362  ff.  The  initial  idea  of  doppelte  Modalitdt  is 
pushed  to  its  extreme  by  J.  B.  Sturm,  Ueber  iterative  Satzgef  iige  im  Lateinischen 
(Program)  Speier,  1890/91,  in  which  examples  are  classed  as  iterative-causal, 
iterative-concessive,  iterative-conditional  (potential),  etc. 

M.  Bonnet,  Le  Subjonctif  de  Re'pe'tition,  Revue  de  Philologie,  vm  (1884),  p. 
75,  had  already  advanced  the  idea  that  the  so-called  iterative  subjunctive  instead 
of  marking  the  idea  of  repetition,  as  claimed  in  some  quarters  (though  expressly 
denied  by  Kiihner,  Ausf.  Gram.  d.  lat.  Sprache,  n,  §  182,  9),  was  even  used  in 
spite  of  that  idea :  On  doit  trouver  pour  le  moins  bizarre,  s'il  est  dans  la  nature 
du  subjonctif  de  marquer  l'ide"e  de  re'pe'tition,  que  les  meilleurs  e*crivains  semblent 
e*viter  ce  mode  quand  ils  veulent  exprimer  cette  ide"e  ....  Les  subjonctifs  de  cette 
fespece  peuvent  et  doivent  s'expliquer  de  meme  que  s'il  s'agissait  de  faits  isole"s  et 
non  re'pe'te's.  Le  subjonctif  est  employe",  dans  ces  exemples  comme  ailleurs,  parce 
que  1'action  de  la  proposition  subordone"e  et  celle  de  la  principale,  au  lieu 
d'etre  simplement  juxtaposes,  sont  pre'sente'es  dans  leur  relation  logique  .... 
L'indicatif  s'est  maintenu  plus  longtemps,  comme  le  constate  la  rSgle  des 
anciennes  grammairs,  parce  qu'il  etait  naturel  de  conside'rer  surtout,  dans 
une  action  re"pe*tee,  le  simple  paralle'lisme  entre  cette  action  et  un  autre  fait, 
egalement  re'pe'te'.  L'e*crivain,  bien  souvent,  restait  libre  d'e'tablier  une  con- 
nexite"  plus  e"troite  entre  les  deux  series  de  faits  ....  Mais,  en  somme,  Fide*e  de 


•*• 
On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  43 

The  subjunctive  in  quotiens  clauses  was,  therefore,  not  taken  up 
so  early  as  in  the  cum  clauses,  nor  was  its  use  at  any  period  ever 
so  free.  The  earliest  example  for  cum  cited  by  Dittmar  is  Enn. 
Ann.  294  (M.);  examples  are  then  found  with  some  frequency 
in  Caesar  and  Cicero.  Lupus l  cites  thirteen  examples  in  Nepos ; 
but  it  is  in  the  silver  and  later  Latinity  of  Valerius  Maximus, 
Pliny  the  Elder,  Tacitus,  Florus,  Suetonius,  and  the  Scriptores 
Historiae  Augustae  that  the  construction  is  most  at  home;  cf. 
Schmalz,3  §  311.  Si  in  the  iterative  clause  appears  at  least  as  early 
as  Catullus  84,  1. 

Chommoda  dicebat,  si  quando  commoda  vellet 

Dicere,  et  insidias  Arrius  hinsidias, 

where,  however,  si  quando  is  practically  equivalent  to  cwm,  or  even 
quotiens  might  have  been  used.  By  the  time  of  Caesar,  Nepos  and 
Cicero  other  particles  and  relatives  have  become  associated.  At 
this  period,  for  the  sake  of  safety,  all  subjunctives  with  quotiens 

re*pe*tition,  loin  de  motiver  Pemploi  du  subjonctif,  a  e*te*  cause  pendant  longtemps 
du  maintien  de  1'indicatif.  Au  lieu  done  d'affirmer  que  le  subjonctif ....  sert  a 
marquer  Pidee  de  repetition,  on  devrait  montrer  dans  quelles  conditions  et  pour 
quelles  raison  le  subjonctif  s'est  introduit,  dans  les  exemples  dont  nous  parlons, 
malgre  Videe  de  repetition. 

On  the  other  hand,  Draeger,  Hist.  Synt.  u,  p.  574,  Schmalz,  Lat.  Synt.3  \\  274, 
311  and  Riemann,  Synt.  lat.,  pp.  331  and  353-355,  hold  the  widely  accepted  view 
that  this  use  of  the  subjunctive  is  due  to  the  influence  of  the  Greek  optative. 
Dittmar,  Stud.  z.  lat.  Moduslehre,  Leipz.  1897,  p.  146,  is  less  positive,  though 
he  seems  to  share  die  Meinung  .  . .  . ,  der  Konjunktiv  sei  in  iterativen  Satzen 
eigentlich  etwas  Unlateinisches  oder  wenigstens  etwas  Unklassisches.  Dittmar's 
list,  however,  is  only  illustrative  and  some  of  his  earlier  examples  cannot  be 
viewed  without  reasonable  doubt. 

The  whole  usage  while  due  to  Greek  influence  originally,  and  even  directly  so 
at  times  later  on,  seems  to  have  been  modified  in  its  possibilities  by  developments 
taking  place  in  the  Latin  itself.  It  thus  became  early  identified  with  cum,  and 
by  consequence  with  the  narrative  tenses,  though  it  was  restricted  to  neither  the 
one  nor  the  other.  The  transition,  however,  to  ut,  ubi  and  other  general  rela- 
tives with  the  imperfect  and  the  pluperfect  was  more  readily  effected  than  was 
the  extension  of  the  present  and  the  perfect  tenses,  where  the  indefinite  second 
person  and  the  potential  construction  did  partial  service.  That  another  force  is 
often  present,  especially  in  earlier  examples,  where  the  subjunctive  is  associated 
with  the  idea  of  repetition  is  true  (cf.  Mdvg.  Klein.  Phil.  Schriften,  Leipz.  1875, 
p.  233),  but  M.  Bonnet  has  carried  his  statement  too  far  in  saying  that  each  sub- 
junctive should  be  explained  in  the  same  manner  as  for  a  single  action ;  cf.  Rie- 
mann, Etudes  sur  Tite-Live,2  Paris,  1885,  p.  294,  n.  1. 

1  Sprachgebr.  d.  Corn.  Nepos,  Berl.  1876,  p.  153. 


44  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

have  been  accounted  for  by  every  other  means  possible,  even  when 
the  idea  of  repeated  action  was  clearly  in  the  sentence ;  as  in  Nepos 

7,  3,  5  quare  fiebat  ut  omnium  oculos,  quotienscunque  in  publicum 
prodisset,1  ad  se  converteret ;  cf.  similar  cases  of  attraction  in  Livy 

8,  35,  10;  23,  32,  3;  Curt.  10,  4,  3;  Plin.  Nat.  Hist.  7,  141; 
Quint.  2,  4,  27;  Frontin.  Aq.  87;  Tac.  Hist.  1,  24,  5;  and  even 
in  Sueton.  Aug.  44;  57;  de  Vir.  111.  p.  138,  17  (Reiff.),  although 
the  strong  tendency  toward  the  so-called  iterative  subjunctive  in 
Sueton.  is  pointed  out  by  Draeger  n,  p>  584,  and  the  subjunctive 
in  the  passages  cited  is  not  necessarily  due  wholly  to  attraction ; 
cf.  Sen.  Controv.  1,  2,  15  iubemur  ut,  quotiens  possurnus.  de  omni- 
bus legis  verbis  controversiam  faciamus;  Quintil  1,  11,  8  curabit 
.  .  .  ut,  quotiens  exclamaudum  erit,  lateris  conatus  sit  ille  non  cap- 
itis ;  Plin.  Epp.  6,  12,  5 ;  Jul.  Capitol.  Yer.  5,  3 ;  Serv.  Aen.  3, 
241 ;  384.2 

Clearer  cases  of  subjunctives  due  to  indirect  discourse,  though 
the  idea  of  repeated  action  is  present,  may  be  seen  in  Livy  31,  44, 
6  sacerdotes  publicos,  quotienscunque  pro  populo  Atheniensi  soci- 
isque,  exercitibus  et  classibus  eorurn  precarentur,  totiens  detestari 
atque  exsecrari  Philippum  ;  39,  39,  11  gratias  populo  Romano  egit, 
quod  tanto  studio,  quotienscunque  declarandae  voluntatis  potestas 
facta  esset,  praetorem  se  voluisset  facere;  and,  similarly,  Petron. 
117;  Plin.  Nat.  Hist.  8,  14  ;  Tac.  Ann.  2,  34,  23;  3,  65,  10;  71, 
11 ;  Sueton.  Calig.  4 ;  Ner.  28 ;  Galba  10. 

In  Curtius  9,  6,  4  mos  erat  principibus  amicorum  et  custodibus 
corporis  excubare  ante  praetorium,  quotiens  ad  versa  regi  valetudo 
incidisset,  the  subjunctive  depends  upon  the  infinitive  construction, 
as  stated  by  Draeger,  though  the  example  is  classed  by  him  as  an 
iterative.  With  this  may  be  compared  Pseudo-Quintil.  p.  377, 
21  (Ritter)  consuetudine  iudiciorum  consequens  est,  q.  aliqua  propria 
actio  in  rem  non  detur,  uti  proxima  et  simili ;  Tac.  Ann.  12,  47,  6 

1  Lupus,  p.  155,  classes  this  as  iterative. 

2  Many  later  examples  of  non-attraction  are  omitted,  especially  after  the  lan- 
guage has  reached  the  point  where  it  often  chooses  to  fare  without  the  "  luxury 
of  a  subjunctive."     Cf.  conspicuous  examples  in  Amm.  Marc.  20,  5,  4  retexere 
superfl uum  puto,  q.  hieme  cruda  .  .  .  indomitos  antea  .  .  .  reppulimus  Alamannos ; 
Cassiod.  vii  (K.)  161,  15  Donatus  dicit,  q.  u  et  i  seu  sibi  seu  aliis  vocalibus  prae- 
ponuntur,  loco  habendas  esse  consonantium. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque.  45 

mos  est  regibus,  q.  in  societatem  coeant,  implicare  dextras.  The 
last  example  is  followed  by  a  clear  case  of  the  perfect  subjunctive 
in  the  same  usage  with  ubi:  mox  ubi  sanguis  in  artus  extremos 
suffuderit,  levi  ictu  cruorem  eliciunt.1 

One-third,  or  more,  of  the  examples  to  be  quoted  are  found  in 
Tacitus  and  Suetonius,  with  by  far  the  larger  number  in  the  latter. 
Prior  to  Tacitus  the  earliest  example  is  Livy  5,  54,  3,  fatebor  vobis 
.  .  .  cum  abessem,  quotienscunque  patria  in  mentem  veniret,  haec 
omnia  occurrebant,  colles  campique  et  Tiberis,  etc.  Here  the  com- 
pound relative  emphasizes  the  iteration,  although  the  subjunctive 
in  the  clause  might  be  due  to  Livy's  having  had  in  mind  haec  omnia 
occurrisse  to  follow  fatebor.  Certainly  at  the  end  of  the  sentence, 
which  continues,  et  hoc  coelum  sub  quo  natus  educatusque  essem, 
the  subjunctive  is  due  to  the  thought  in  the  mind  of  the  speaker 
Camillus.  Other  instances  of  the  imperfect  are  Sen.  Controv.  4 
praef.  7  q.  velles  eandem  rem  et  quamdiu  velles2  diceret,  aliis  totiens 
figuris  (sc.  dicebat);  Quintil.  1,  7,  20,  q.  S  littera  media  vocalium 
longarum  .  .  .  esset,  geminabatur;  2,  4,  13  q.  eandem  materiam 
rursus  a  me  tractatam  scribere  de  integro  iuberem  ;  9,  4,  38  q.  ul- 
tima esset  (sc.  littera  S) :  Stat.  Silv.  5,  3,  215  Latios  q.  ego  carmine 
patres  Mulcerem ;  Frontin.  Aq.  12  q.  siccitates  egerent  auxilio ; 
Strat.  2,  13,  7  q.  prima  luce  moveret;  ibid.  3,  3,  4  q.  acie  decerta- 
retur ;  and  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  that  the  younger  Pliny  has 
the  construction  already  allowed  by  his  master  Quintilian ; 3  cf. 
Epp.  3,  16,  4  q.  cubiculum  eius  intraret,  vivere  filium  .  .  .  simu- 
labat;  Pan.  13  q.  ...  clipeo  gravior  ictus  incideret ;  ibid.  42  q. 
quisque  similes  principi  servos  haberet. 

For  the  pluperfect  up  to  the  time  of  Tacitus,  but  three  examples 
are  to  be  cited:  Sen.  Controv.  10  praef.  13  hi  (sc.  rhetores)  q. 
conflixissent,  penes  Gallionem  palma;  Pliu.  Nat.  Hist.  23,  56  ab 
aspide  percussus  utrem  aceti  ferens,  q.  deposuisset,  sentiebat  ictum  ; 
Quintil.  6,  1,  40  q.  respexisset  patron  us. 

Examples  of  the  present  and  the  perfect  subjunctives  of  itera- 

1  Dittmar,  p.  149,  cites  both  the  examples  from  Tacitus,  Prof.  Hale,  p.  239, 
only  the  latter. 

*The  post  potential  force  is  of  course  still  felt. 
3  Cf.  Plin.  Epp.  2,  14,  10,  in  another  connection. 


46  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienscunque. 

tion l  are  neither  so  numerous  as  the  other  two  tenses,  nor  so  early. 
For  the  period  selected  above,  the  following  instances  may  be  cited  : 
Plin.  Nat.  Hist.  17, 129  atque  ita  alia  arbore  ex  eadem  iuvenescente 
iterumque  et  q.  opus  sit  ut  aevis  eadem  oliveta  constent;  18,  350 
sunt  et  ipsius  lunae  vin  articuli,  q.  in  angulos  solis  incidat ;  34, 
122  q.  opus  sit  molliri  vim  eius,  mel  adspergitur;  Plin.  Epp.  8, 
20,  1  quod  differimus  tamquam  saepe  visuri  quod  datur  videre,  q. 
velis  cernere. — Sen.  Epp.  19,  1,  17  hoc  itaque  ipse  mihi  dico,  q. 
tale  aliquid  praestrinxerit  oculos  meos;  Plin.  Nat.  Hist.  18,  259 
senescunt  prata  restituique  debent  .  .  .  ,  praeterea  q.  secta  sint 
siciliri ;  23,  103  fit  et  oleum  ex  his  quod  melinum  vocavimus,  q. 
non  fuerint  in  umidis  nata;  36,  134  palmati  circa  Mundam  in 
Hispania  .  .  .  reperiuntur,  idque  q.  fregeris,  etc. 

Later  writers  with  the  exception  of  Suetonius  have  held  rather 
to  the  classical  usage  with  the  indicative.  In  Tacitus  an  interest- 
ing development  presents  itself.  The  early  Dialogus,  Agricola 
and  Germania,  which  show  most  strongly  the  influence  of  classical 
models,  contain  only  indicative  examples ;  the  Historiae  show  but 
two  examples2  1,  66,  19  q.  pecuniae  materia  deesset,  stupris  et 
adulteriis  exorabatur,  and  3,  83,  3  q.  pars  altera  inclinasset,  while 
in  the  Annales,  where  the  author  is  most  under  the  influence  of 
contemporary  usage,  six  instances  are  found :  2,  2,  12  q.  per  urbes 

1  The  use  of  these  tenses  in  this  manner  has  not  always  been  granted,  especially 
since  Madvig's  note  denying  the  usage  in  the  perfect  in  Cic.  de  Fin.  5,  41 :  Libra- 
rii  tamen,  quibus  post  cum  coniunctivus  modus  magis  placebat,  non  raro  aut  u 
litteram  in  »  mutarunt  aut  notam  illam  qua  er  significatur,  addiderunt .  .  .  edito- 
resque  habuerunt  obsequentes.  Madvig,  therefore,  in  his  second  edition  of  Livyr 
adopted  Wesenberg's  fuit  for  fuerit  of  the  MSS.  in  1,  32,  8  quicunque  ei  primus 
vir  obvius  fuerit.  The  MS.  reading,  however,  is  stoutly  defended  by  Frizell, 
Epilegg.  ad  T.  Liv.  lib.  I,  Upsala,  1881,  p.  49,  who  adds,  with  reference  to  Livy's 
whole  usage,  iam  per  se  credibile  atque  ad  fidem  pronum  est  etiam  in  perfectis  et 
praesentibus  eum  ab  usu  coniunctivi  non  abhoruisse.  In  his  review  of  Frizell, 
Kevue  critique,  1881,  u,  p.  89,  Riemann  denies  this  usage  for  the  particular  ex- 
ample and  in  general.  Later,  however,  he  withdraws  his  general  objection :  J'ai 
combattu  cette  opinion,  peut-etre  d'une  maniere  trop  absolue  .  .  .  je  crois  aujourd' 
hui  que  cet  emploi  du  subjonctif  dont  parle  Frizell  a  pu  en  effet  exister  en  latin. 
Etudes  sur  Tite-Live,  Paris,  1885,  p.  297 ;  cf.  also  Draeger  n,  p.  573,  and  Ditt- 
mar,  p.  149,  Anm. 

2Cf.  Hist.  1;  10,  8  nimiae  voluptates,  cum  vacaret;  q.  se  expedierat,  magnae 
virtutes,  where  the  indicative  is  retained  even  in  violation  of  symmetry.  See 
Wolff.,  abstract,  1. 1.  p.  399. 


On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quotienseunque.  47 

incederet;  4,  3,  19  promptus  eloquebatur,  q.  subveniret;  6, 10, 13 
q.  necessitas  ingrueret;  15,  13  q.  curiam  ingrederetur :  21,  1  q. 
super  tali  negotio  consultaret,  edita  domus  parte  ....  utebatur ; 
13,  3,  16  q.  meditata  dissereret. 

Further  examples  of  the  two  common  tenses  may  be  cited  by 
reference  alone. 

Imperfect— Terent.  Scaur,  vn  (K.)  25, 18  ;  Sueton.  Jul.  26 ;  28 ; 
Aug.  21  ;  38  ;  41 ;  45 ;  56  ;  77  ;  82  ;  Tib.  19  ;  Calig.  7  (quotiens- 
que)  ;  33  ;  35  ;  Claud.  8 ;  Nero  15  ;  27  ;  Otho  4 ;  Domit.  2 ;  21 ;  de 
Vir.  111.  p.  24,  3  (Reiff.) ;  61,  4;  Ael.  Lamprid.  Commod.  11, 
11 ;  Mar.  Victorin.  vi  (K.)  12,  17  ;  Jul.  Paris  ad  Valer.  Max.  8, 
10,  1  ;  Claudian.  Carm.  Min.  30,  97. 

Pluperfect— Sueton.  Aug.  99;  Calig.  36;  Claud.  42;  Plin. 
(Med.)  3,  30  ad  fin  ;  Prudent.  Perist.  10,  758  ;  Serv.  ad  Aen.  11, 
517;  Claudian.  de  in.  Cons.  Honor.  25;  de  vn.  C.  H.  82;  in 
Kufin.  2,  75;  Eugipp.  Vit.  Sanct.  Sever,  p.  33,  1. 

In  this  second  period  but  three  examples  of  the  present  sub- 
junctive in  iterative  clauses  have  been  noted  :  Terent.  Scaur,  vn 
(K.)  11,  9  per  immutationem,  ut  cum  at  coniunctionem  per  d  scri- 
bunt  et  eandem,  q.  praepositio  sit,  per  t ;  Sid.  Apoll.  Epp.  1,  7, 
7  q.  desperatum  furor  arripiat ;  Prise,  n  (K.)  37,  21  in  Graecis 
vero,  q.  huiuscemodi  fiat  apud  nos  diaeresis  paenultimae  syllabae, 
i  pro  duplici  consonante  accipitur. 

Examples  of  the  perfect,  however,  are  somewhat  more  numerous, 
though  sometimes,  as  in  Cass.  Felix,  for  example,  it  is  difficult  to 
distinguish  the  future  perfect  from  examples  belonging  properly  in 
this  category.  With  the  exception  of  Cassius  Felix  and  Enno- 
dius,  the  examples  are  sporadic.  Terent.  Scaurus  again  has  one 
instance,  vn  (K.)  25,  19  q.  ergo  a  liquida  littera  sequens  coeperit 
verbum  ....  primam  litteram  geminant ;  cf.  further  Ampel.  8, 
17  sed  q.  ventus  aut  pluvia  fuerit  non  movet;  Cypr.  App.  p.  33,  7 
sic  q.  tempestatibus  diu  nauta  fatigatus  litora  tuta  cpntigerit,  felici- 
tatem  suam  de  perpesso  periculo  ducit;  Lactant.  p.  576, 17  (L.-B.  1) 
totiens  sacrificat,  q.  bonum  aliquid  ac  pium  fecerit ;  Diom.  I  (K.) 
427,  28  q.  inter  duas  vel  plures  consonantes  posita  sit ;  Serv.  Eel. 
1,  8  unde  necesse  est,  pastores  totiens  aras  imbuere,  q.  mutaverint 
pascua;  Cass.  Felix  38  contingit  frequentur  .  .  .  ,  q.  plus  frigoris 
quam  possit  natura  corporis  ferre  sustinuerint  laborantes ;  60  con- 


48  On  the  Usage  of  Quotiens  and  Quolienscunque. 

tingunt  frequenter  .  .  .  ,  q.  glandulosa  fuerint  ipsa  inguina ;  61  et 
fit  q.  tumor  epatis  et  splenis  apparuerit ;  72  contingit  vero  hoc,  q, 
ipsa  violentia  insurrexerint  aniinalia;  Ennod.  p.  69,  4  condicio, 
quae  q.  desideriis  aliquo  sapore  respondent,  mox  et  in  foribus  con- 
cessa  permutat;  171,  8  q.  votiva  res  repente  contigerit,  pretiuni  de 
ipsa  temporis  brevitate  sortitur;  437,  23  blandimentum  est,  q. 
laborem  gloria  ingesta  praecesserit ;  471,  16  reducitur  puritas,  q. 
generalitatis  oculos  expiaveris  cruce  noxiorum;  Carm.  1,  8  praef. 
1  non  ponit  fistulam  q.  rusticura  pecus  agrestis  pastor  iuspexerit ; 
Cypr.  Gall.  Exod.  980  q.  sementem  sparseris  agro. 


MAR  4    ,948 

1  1954 


YC  00523 


